Patent Cooperation Treaty Yearly Review 2019

The International Patent System Patent Cooperation Treaty Yearly Review 2019

The International Patent System Except where otherwise indicated, this publication is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO License.

The user is allowed to reproduce, distribute, adapt, translate and publicly perform this publication, including for commercial purposes, without explicit permission, provided that the content is accompanied by an acknowledgement that WIPO is the source and that it is clearly indicated if changes were made to the original content.

Suggested citation: WIPO (2019), PCT Yearly Review 2019: The International Patent System. Geneva: WIPO.

Adaptation/translation/derivatives should not carry any official emblem or logo, unless they have been approved and validated by WIPO. Please contact us via the WIPO website to obtain permission.

For any derivative work, please include the following disclaimer: “The Secretariat of WIPO assumes no liability or responsibility with regard to the transformation or translation of the original content.”

When content published by WIPO, such as images, graphics, trademarks or logos, is attributed to a third party, the user of such content is solely responsible for clearing the rights with the right holder(s). © WIPO, 2019 To view a copy of this license, please visit https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/3.0/igo First published 2019

The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout World Intellectual Property Organization this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever 34, chemin des Colombettes, P.O. Box 18 on the part of WIPO concerning the legal status of any country, terri- CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland tory or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. ISBN: 978-92-805-3031-5

This publication is not intended to reflect the views of the Member Attribution 3.0 IGO States or the WIPO Secretariat. The mention of specific companies or (CC BY 3.0 IGO) products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by WIPO in preference to others of a similar nature that Photo credits: Getty Images / chinaface are not mentioned. Printed in Switzerland Table of contents

Acknowledgements 4 C. Statistics on the performance Further information 4 of the PCT System 73 Highlights 73 Key numbers for 2018 5 PCT applications by publication language and filing medium 77 Special theme: Timeliness in processing PCT 40 years of the Patent applications by the International Cooperation Treaty 7 Bureau 78 Efficiency in processing PCT A. Statistics on applications by the the international phase: International Bureau 79 PCT applications 21 Receiving offices 81 Highlights 21 International searching authorities 84 Global trends in PCT applications 27 Supplementary international PCT applications by receiving office 28 searching authorities 88 PCT applications by origin 29 International preliminary PCT applications by applicant type 32 examining authorities 88 Top PCT applicants 35 PCT-Patent Prosecution PCT applications by fields Highway pilots 90 of technology 40 PCT applications filed via ePCT 91 Participation of women inventors in PCT applications 43 Annexes 93 Statistical table 47 A brief presentation of the Patent Cooperation Treaty 93 B. Statistics on PCT Data description 96 national phase entries 51 Acronyms 97 Highlights 51 Glossary 98 Global trends in PCT national PCT Contracting States 102 phase entries 55 National phase entries by origin 56 National phase entries by office 59 Patent applications by filing route 63 Top applicants in foreign-oriented patent families 66 Statistical table 68

3 Acknowledgements

The PCT Yearly Review was developed under the direction of Francis Gurry (Director General) and supervised by Carsten Fink (Chief Economist). The report was prepared by a team led by Bruno Le Feuvre and comprising Kyle Bergquist, Mosahid Khan, Ryan Lamb, Anastasiya Letnikava and Hao Zhou, all from the Economics and Statistics Division.

Thanks go to colleagues from the Patents and Technology Sector for providing valuable comments on drafts at various stages.

Samiah Do Carmo Figueiredo, Caterina Valles Galmès and Cécile Roure provided valuable administrative support. Gratitude is also due to the Communications Division for the editing and design of the review, and to the Printing Plant for their services.

Finally, WIPO is grateful to national and regional patent offices for sharing their annual statistics.

Further information

Online resources

The electronic version of the Review, as well as the underlying data used to compile all figures and tables, can be downloaded atwww.wipo.int/ipstats . This webpage also provides links to the IP Statistics Data Center – offering access to WIPO’s statistical data – and the IP Statistical Country Profiles.

The following other patent resources are available on WIPO's website:

• PCT homepage – WIPO’s gateway to PCT resources for applicants, offices and the public.

• PCT Newsletter – PCT monthly publication containing information about the filing of PCT applications and news about changes relating to the PCT.

• PATENTSCOPE – enables the search and download of published PCT applications and national/regional patent collections. Also provides access to related patent and technology information programs and services.

Contact information

Economics and Statistics Division Website: www.wipo.int/ipstats Email: [email protected]

4 Key numbers for 2018

630,000 (+2.3%) PCT national phase entries

253,000 (+3.9%) PCT applications filed

54,341 (+3.8%) Applicants

127 (+1) Countries in which PCT applications were filed

57.3% (+1 percentage point) Share of PCT national phase entries in worldwide non-resident filings

17.1% (+0.8 percentage points) Share of women among PCT inventors

Note: The latest available year for PCT national phase entry data is 2017. “Applicants” refers to first named applicants in published PCT applications.

5 6 Special theme: 40 years of the Patent Cooperation Treaty

Over a period of 40 years, the Patent Cooperation months. This is why 1979 – the first full year of oper- Treaty (PCT) has steadily grown and is now the largest ation – is also used as a reference year in the analy- international intellectual property (IP) filing system for sis. By contrast, data for PCT national phase entries the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (NPEs) are only partially complete, as few such data and the preferred filing route for applicants seeking are available for the period before 1995. Given the time patent protection in foreign jurisdictions. required to collect data from offices around the world, 2017 is the latest available year for NPEs. The NPEs In 1978, the PCT entered into force in 13 member period analyzed here is therefore 23 years. States. During that year, the PCT gradually came into operation. Patent offices – acting as receiving offices – began to receive and process PCT applications starting Box 1. on June 1, 1978. That same day, the European Patent Main changes to the PCT legal framework Office (EPO), the United States Patent and Trademark since 1978 Office (USPTO) and the patent offices of Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom (U.K.) Over the past four decades, the PCT System has received their first PCT applications, from a total of 12 constantly improved for both applicants and patent PCT applications filed. By comparison, in 2018, appli- offices. One of the reasons for the PCT’s success cants filed a total of almost 700 PCT applications per over the years has been member States’ responsive- day, on average. ness and willingness to adapt the PCT System to the ever-changing needs of stakeholders. Through amend- This year’s special theme analyzes the long-term trends ments to the PCT Regulations, the System has con- for the two phases of the System, the international tinually been modernized, made safer, more applicant and the national phases (for details, see annex, A brief friendly, and more useful as a filing tool for applicants presentation of the Patent Cooperation Treaty). Since and a work-sharing tool for offices. the PCT first began operating, additional key global economic players have emerged – notably China – While change is constantly underway in the PCT, three and innovation has shaped the development of new major reform processes deserve special mention: products, such as smartphones. These developments are apparent in the long-term statistics of the interna- • In 1984, the Assembly of the PCT adopted many tional phase of the PCT. We will also see which appli- amendments to the legal framework, affecting more cants have made the greatest use of the PCT and in than one third of PCT Regulations. Based on the which countries and regions of the world applicants experience gained since PCT operations first began have applied the most for patent protection through in 1978, these amendments simplified the System, the PCT over time. streamlined procedures and introduced greater safeguards against the possible mistakes that an Complete data are available for the international phase. applicant might make when filing. Analysis can therefore span in its entirety the period • In 2000, member States launched a second major during which the System has been in existence. Since process of reform of the PCT legal framework, which the first PCT filing was made on June 1, 1978, the full continued until 2007. This process further harmo- period covered by the analysis is 40 years and seven nized requirements as to the form and contents of

7 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 SPECIAL THEME

a PCT application, introduced written opinions on exception of Argentina. About three-quarters of middle- patentability criteria at international search, provided income countries were also members of the PCT, as for an optional supplementary international search, were just over 70% of low-income economies. modified time limits, notably for national phase entry, and enabled electronic filing media. Up until 1990, high-income countries represented the • In 2010, member States endorsed the so-called majority of member States. Since when their share “PCT roadmap recommendations”, which have since has gradually decreased from 55.6% in 1990 down to guided work in the further development of the PCT 35.5% in 2018. The shares of upper middle-income System. These recommendations were a recognition and lower middle-income countries have increased that, while changes to the legal framework would since 1978, reaching 26.3% and 22.4% of total mem- continue to play an important supportive role, the bership, respectively, in 2018. The share of members key to future improvements lay in putting a renewed in the low-income category has followed an opposite emphasis on the aim of “cooperation” underpinning trend, decreasing from 30% of all members in 1978 the Treaty. It recognized the shared responsibility of down to 15.8% in 2018. contracting States and national and regional offices, together with the International Bureau, to put further By 2004, 26 years after the System became opera- life into that “cooperation” aim towards making the tional, the total number of PCT applications filed since PCT System fully effective as a tool to support inno- 1978 had reached one million (see figure S2). The two vation, investment and development, as envisaged in millionth PCT application was filed only seven years the Treaty. Member States reconfirmed the underlying later and it took just a further five years to reach the objectives of those PCT roadmap recommendations three millionth application mark. Given that by 2018, in 2018. 3.7 million PCT applications had been filed since 1978, the four millionth application is likely to have been filed Furthermore, the PCT has helped bring together formal by early 2020. If this proves to be the case, it would and procedural requirements for national and regional correspond to one million PCT applications filed in applications filed outside of the PCT System. Many slightly under four years. States have chosen, of their own accord, to adapt their legislation applicable to national or regional applica- The proportion of filings from high-income coun- tions to the requirements as to form or contents that tries decreased from 97.7% of total filings between apply to international applications filed under the 1978 and 2004 to 89.6% over the past 40 years. The PCT. In addition, the Patent Law Treaty (PLT), which share of PCT applications filed by upper middle- and entered into force in 2005, incorporates many of these lower middle-income countries has increased over the requirements, thereby eliminating or greatly reducing period, with filings from upper middle-income coun- procedural differences between national, regional and tries accounting for 9.7% of the total since 1978. The international patent systems. share for low-income economies has remained stable at 0.01% of total filings.

Global trends in membership and in filing activity Long-term trends in filings of PCT applications Since the PCT first became operational, the number of member States has increased significantly: at the The number of PCT applications filed year-on-year end of 1978, 20 states were members of the PCT (see has steadily increased to reach a quarter of a million figure S1); by 1990, this had increased to 45. The num- applications filed in 2018 (253,000) (see figure S3). ber of new members joining increased sharply during Only in 2009 did the number of PCT applications filed the 1990s, reaching 108 members by 2000. Between decrease compared to the previous year, coinciding 2010 and 2018, the flow of new member States slowed, with the most recent global economic downturn. increasing from 142 to 152 – likely due to the by then already high global coverage. Up until the mid-1990s, Europe and North America, together, accounted for around 88% of total filings. By 2018, about 80% of the world's countries were However, since 1995, this combined share has been members of the PCT. This includes more than 90% steadily decreasing, while at the same time filings in of all high-income countries; or, every high-income Asia have increased. In 2009, Asia surpassed North country with more than 300,000 inhabitants, with the America in the number of PCT applications filed and, a

8 40 YEARS OF THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY SPECIAL THEME

S1. PCT member States by income group, per decade

160

140

120

100

60 Member States

0 1978 1990 2000 2010 2018 Year HIGH-INCOME UPPER MIDDLE-INCOME LOWER MIDDLE-INCOME LOW-INCOME

Note: member States are allocated to income groups based on the 2018 classification. For information on income group classification, see annex, Data description. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

S2. Cumulative number of PCT applications filed by income group, per million filing

5,000,000

4,000,000

3,000,000

2,000,000 PCT applications PCT

1,000,000

0 2004 2011 2016 2020 (estimate) International filing year HIGH-INCOME UPPER MIDDLE-INCOME LOWER MIDDLE-INCOME LOW-INCOME

Note: Data for 2020 are WIPO estimate. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

9 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 SPECIAL THEME

year later, it overtook Europe to become the most active Only four countries, from three different regions, region in terms of PCT filings. In 2018 – for the first time have filed more than a quarter of a million PCT appli- since the inception of the PCT – more than half of total cations in 40 years. Such is the case for the U.S. filings originated from a single region: Asia (50.5%). (1,156,062), Japan (641,903), Germany (387,338) and China (303,103). The Republic of Korea (169,455), In 1978, the vast majority of PCT applications were pub- France (152,356) and the U.K. (135,226) have each lished in English (63.5%) and, up until 2015, it was the exceeded 100,000 PCT applications filed in 40 years. language of publication for a majority of applications. In 2018, English accounted for under half (45.6%) of Computer technology has been the field of technol- total published PCT applications, followed by Japanese ogy to feature most often in published PCT applica- (19.6%) and Chinese (17.9%). Similarly, the medium for tions over the past 40 years, with 233,932 applications filing of PCT applications has changed considerably (see figure S6). Medical technology (226,485), elec- over the past 40 years. In 1978, paper was the only fil- trical machinery (207,018) and digital communication ing medium available for PCT applications, whereas in (203,446) have each also exceeded 200,000 applica- 2018, only 2.9% of all filings were made on paper and tions during this time and, since 2017, have risen above the remainder (97.1%) was filed electronically. 15,000 applications per year.

Over the past 40 years, Europe (1,219,399), North Of the top 10 technology fields since 1978, digital America (1,213,077) and Asia (1,200,024) have filed communication (+26%), pharmaceuticals (+19.7%) and a similar total number of PCT applications. Together, computer technology (+19.6%) have seen the highest these three regions account for 97.6% of total filings average annual growth rates. They are followed by bio- made since 1978. Oceania (52,718), Latin America technology (+17.5%), audio-visual technology (+16.1%) and the Caribbean (LAC) (21,620) and Africa (9,596) and medical technology (+16%). recorded much lower volumes over the same period. Between 1978 and 1998, medical technology (6.4%), Since 1978, applicants residing in the United States biotechnology (6.2%), organic fine chemistry (6.1%), of America (U.S.) have filed 31.1% of total applications measurement (4.6%) and electrical machinery (4.6%) (see figure S4). Together with applicants from Japan accounted for the highest proportions of published (17.3%), they have accounted for almost half (48.3%) PCT applications (see figure S7). Combined, the top of total PCT filings. When Germany (10.4%), China five technical fields represented 27.9% of total pub- (8.1%) and the Republic of Korea (4.6%) are added to lished applications during this period. this total, the top five countries, combined, filed 71.4% of total PCT applications during this period. Between 1999 and 2018, the main fields of technology were computer technology (7.2%), medical technol- Compared to the filing activity since 1978, applications ogy (6.6%), digital communication (6.4%), electrical filed in 2018 were more concentrated among the top machinery (6.2%) and pharmaceuticals (4.7%), together five origins (77.5%). In contrast, the share for those accounting for 31.1% of total published applications. Of countries outside of the top five origins declined, from the top five technical fields of the past 20 years, medical 28.5% over the entire period to 22.6% in 2018. Of the technology and electrical machinery also featured as top five origins, China is the one to have experienced two of the top five fields of technology between 1978 the largest increase in share, rising from a cumulative and 1998. In contrast, digital communication (+4.9 8.1% over the past 40 years to 21.1% in 2018. This percentage points) and computer technology (+4 per- is particularly notable, given that between 1978 and centage points) saw their respective shares increase 1993, Chinese applicants filed only five PCT applica- sharply between these two periods. tions. On current trends, China will exceed the U.S. in the course of 2020. Panasonic of Japan had the highest number of published PCT applications since 1978, with 34,081 appli- Most of the applications filed in Africa between 1978 cations (see table S8). Huawei (33,899) from China and 2018 originated from South Africa (76.6%) (see – which started filing PCT applications only as recently table S5). In Asia, Japan (53.3%) filed the majority of as 2000 – ranked second with just 182 fewer pub- applications. In North America and Oceania, the U.S. lished applications than Panasonic. They were fol- (95.3%) and Australia (86.1%) largely dominated fil- lowed by three companies based in Europe, namely, ing activity. Only in Europe and LAC were filings less Philips Electronics from the Netherlands (32,783), concentrated in a single country, where Germany and Robert Bosch (27,654) and Siemens (27,403), both from Brazil accounted each for the largest proportion of fil- Germany. Qualcomm (24,858), which ranked seventh, ings, with 31.8% and 41.6% of the total, respectively. was the top U.S.-based applicant on the list.

10 40 YEARS OF THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY SPECIAL THEME

S3. Trends in filings of PCT applications by region, 1978–2018

250,000

200,000

150,000

100,000 PCT applications PCT

50,000

0 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

International filing year EUROPE NORTH AMERICA ASIA OCEANIA LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN AFRICA

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

S4. Distribution of PCT applications filed by origin, 1978–2018 and 2018

31.1% 22.2% U.S. U.S. 8.1% 21.1% China China 17.3% 19.6% Japan Japan 10.4% 7.8% Germany Germany 4.6% 6.7% Republic of Korea Republic of Korea 28.5% 22.6% Others Others

1978–2018 2018

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

11 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 SPECIAL THEME

S5. PCT applications filed by the top 10 origins per region, 1978–2018

Region Name PCT applications Regional share (%)

Africa South Africa 7,346 76.6 Egypt 699 7.3 Morocco 466 4.9 Algeria 137 1.4 Tunisia 120 1.3 Seychelles 113 1.2 Kenya 103 1.1 Mauritius 87 0.9 Namibia 85 0.9 Sudan 62 0.6 Others 378 3.9 Total* 9,596 0.3 Asia Japan 641,903 53.5 China 303,103 25.3 Republic of Korea 169,455 14.1 Israel 31,649 2.6 India 20,275 1.7 Singapore 11,994 1.0 Turkey 10,017 0.8 Saudi Arabia 3,065 0.3 Malaysia 3,041 0.3 Thailand 1,012 0.1 Others 4,510 0.4 Total* 1,200,024 32.3 Europe Germany 387,338 31.8 France 152,356 12.5 United Kingdom 135,226 11.1 Netherlands 91,443 7.5 Sweden 87,896 7.2 Switzerland 80,791 6.6 Italy 56,699 4.6 Finland 43,499 3.6 Denmark 29,706 2.4 Spain 26,799 2.2 Others 127,646 10.5 Total* 1,219,399 32.8 Latin America and the Caribbean Brazil 8,986 41.6 Mexico 3,936 18.2 Barbados 3,206 14.8 Chile 1,531 7.1 Colombia 1,156 5.3 Panama 487 2.3 Argentina 460 2.1 Bahamas 396 1.8 Cuba 229 1.1 Ecuador 212 1.0 Others 1,021 4.7 Total* 21,620 0.6 North America United States of America 1,156,062 95.3 Canada 57,015 4.7 Total* 1,213,077 32.6 Oceania Australia 45,375 86.1 New Zealand 7,273 13.8 Samoa 32 0.1 Vanuatu 21 0.0 Marshall Islands 7 0.0 Fiji 4 0.0 Papua New Guinea 3 0.0 Micronesia (Federated States of) 2 0.0 Tonga 1 0.0 Total* 52,718 1.4 Unknown 4,507 n.a. Total 3,720,941 n.a.

* indicates share of world total. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

12 40 YEARS OF THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY SPECIAL THEME

S6. Trend of the top 10 fields of technology, 1978–2018

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000 PCT applications PCT 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Publication year

COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ELECTRICAL MACHINERY, APPARATUS, ENERGY DIGITAL COMMUNICATION PHARMACEUTICALS MEASUREMENT BIOTECHNOLOGY ORGANIC FINE CHEMISTRY TRANSPORT AUDIO-VISUAL TECHNOLOGY

Note: For confidentiality reasons, data are based on published applications and on the publication date. WIPO’s IPC technology concordance table (available at: www.wipo.int/ipstats) was used to convert IPC symbols into 35 corresponding fields of technology. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

S7. Distribution of published PCT applications by field of technology, 1978–1998 and 1999–2018

Computer technology Medical technology Digital communication Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy Pharmaceuticals Measurement Transport Biotechnology Audio-visual technology Organic fine chemistry Semiconductors Telecommunications Optics Basic materials chemistry Civil engineering Engines, pumps, turbines Other special machines Mechanical elements Handling Chemical engineering Other consumer goods

Field of technology of Field Furniture, games Macromolecular chemistry, polymers Machine tools Materials, metallurgy IT methods for management Surface technology, coating Control Textile and paper machines Thermal processes and apparatus Environmental technology Analysis of biological materials Food chemistry Basic communication processes Micro-structural and nano-technology

0 2 4 6 8

Share (%)

1978-1998 1999-2018

13 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 SPECIAL THEME

S8. Top 50 PCT applicants, 1978–2018

Ranking in PCT applications 1978–2018 1990 2000 2010 2018 Applicant Origin 1978–2018

1 23 6 1 12 PANASONIC IP MANAGEMENT CO., LTD. Japan 34,081 2 6,896 4 1 HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. China 33,899 3 2 5 18 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. Netherlands 32,783 4 2 5 6 10 ROBERT BOSCH CORPORATION Germany 27,654 5 5 1 12 14 SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT Germany 27,403 6 2 5 ZTE CORPORATION China 25,746 7 1,510 16 3 4 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED U.S. 24,858 8 98 3 9 9 TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL) Sweden 22,429 9 72 19 14 2 MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION Japan 19,342 10 22 62 3 INTEL CORPORATION U.S. 17,963 11 378 7 8 LG ELECTRONICS INC. Republic of Korea 17,349 12 833 261 8 16 SHARP KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japan 16,593 13 1,510 37 17 6 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. Republic of Korea 15,680 14 195 13 16 30 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY U.S. 14,746 15 22 7 13 34 BASF SE Germany 14,654 16 127 17 28 13 SONY CORPORATION Japan 14,563 17 1,510 223 11 236 TOYOTA JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japan 14,201 18 4 27 36 PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY U.S. 13,603 19 122 10 22 NEC CORPORATION Japan 13,282 20 30 20 11 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC U.S. 12,870 21 1,510 160 18 15 HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT U.S. 12,095 COMPANY, L .P. 22 61 15 35 NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY Finland 11,749 23 34 27 19 43 FUJITSU LIMITED Japan 10,049 24 84 18 26 27 HITACHI, LTD. Japan 9,854 25 6 12 116 329 MOTOROLA, INC. U.S. 9,666 26 8 11 21 460 E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS U.S. 9,352 27 48 21 FUJIFILM Corporation Japan 8,736 28 21 23 38 38 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA U.S. 8,096 29 195 62 22 100 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES U.S. 7,706 CORPORATION 30 7 BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO.,LTD China 7,443 31 84 13 50 15,525 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY U.S. 7,422 32 1,513 20 48 15,578 HENKEL KOMMANDITGESELLSCHAFT Germany 7,105 AUF AKTIEN 33 244 90 6,706 HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC. U.S. 6,802 34 6,896 39 23 MURATA MANUFACTURING CO., LTD. Japan 6,428 35 378 60 20 LG CHEM, LTD. Republic of Korea 6,424 36 321 151 35 96 KABUSHIKI KAISHA TOSHIBA Japan 5,966 37 1,510 206 25 OLYMPUS CORPORATION Japan 5,935 38 71 24 GOOGLE INC. U.S. 5,893 39 59 38 198 123 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC. U.S. 5,580 40 77 32 166 THOMSON LICENSING France 5,554 41 226 423 24 72 CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japan 5,440 42 40 SHENZHEN CHINA STAR OPTOELECTRONICS China 5,337 TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD 43 36 32 48 APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. U.S. 5,233 44 51 45 DOW GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. U.S. 5,013 45 2,190 862 19 DENSO CORPORATION Japan 4,910 46 1 482 54 1,132 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY U.S. 4,808 47 46 52 68 CORNING INCORPORATED U.S. 4,801 48 1,510 616 73 51 APPLE INC. U.S. 4,733 49 833 77 53 66 DAIKIN INDUSTRIES, LTD. Japan 4,688 50 1,510 6,896 47 47 KYOCERA CORPORATION Japan 4,682

Note: For confidentiality reasons, data are based on published applications. Data for Panasonic Corporation are included in data for Panasonic IP Management Co., Ltd. Data for Microsoft Corporation are included in data for Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC. Data for Nokia Corporation are included in data for Nokia Technologies Oy. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

14 40 YEARS OF THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY SPECIAL THEME

The top 50 list of PCT applicants comprises applicants Africa, Europe and LAC, whereas North America and from nine countries. The U.S. heads the list with 19 Asia have experienced compound annual growth rates applicants, followed by Japan (16), Germany (4), China of 3.1% and 2.1%, respectively, since 1995. (4), the Republic of Korea (3), Finland (1), France (1), the Netherlands (1) and Sweden (1). The top 50 list Over the period 1995–2017, the PCT route has repre- comprises only businesses, with the exception of the sented 49.5% of total non-resident filings (see figure University of California (8,096). S10). Applicants filed the majority of non-resident applications using the PCT System in every geographical Seven of the top 10 applicants over the past 40 years region, except for North America (33.8%). appeared among the top 10 applicants in 2018. Exceptions were Panasonic (ranked 12th in 2018), Oceania had the highest share of NPEs, comprising Philips Electronics (18th) and Siemens (14th). Each of the 74.8% of its total non-resident patent applications, top 10 applicants since 1978 has been mainly active followed by Africa (67.7%), LAC (63.3%), Asia (56.9%) in the electrical engineering sector. and Europe (52%). The Paris route has remained the preferred filing route in North America, representing 66.2% of non-resident applications. PCT NPEs as a proportion of total non-resident applications For offices of high-income group countries, the overall share of NPEs in total non-resident filings increased Patent applications from non-resident applicants from 37.1% in 2000 to 51.8% in 2017 (see figure S11). received by offices worldwide have trended upward Likewise, the average share for offices of middle- over the past two decades, growing at a compound income countries grew from 49.2% to 70.7% during annual growth rate of 9.6% for PCT NPEs and 1.9% the same period. for the Paris route (see figure S9). The faster rate of growth of non-resident NPEs allowed them to exceed In 1980, only 10.2% of non-resident filings at the the number of non-resident filings made through the EPO were NPEs. This share had increased to 16.1% Paris route in 2007, when they reached an estimated a decade later. Between 1990 and 2000, the use of 526,000 NPEs. Applicants filed about 391,400 non- the PCT System increased sharply, with the majority resident applications directly at offices the same year. (50.3%) of non-resident applications being NPEs in 2000. Since when, this share has continued to grow The driving force behind this increase in the number and represented over two thirds of non-resident filings of non-resident NPEs is the filing activity witnessed made at the EPO in 2017. in Asia and North America. Asia has shown a steady upward trend over the observed period, apart from Data for 1990 were also available for the office of Brazil a sharp decline during the global financial crisis in and for the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) 2008, and since 2013, has received over 200,000 non- and show similar trends as for the EPO in the propor- resident NPEs per year. Asia has been followed by tions of NPEs in total non-resident filings received North America, which received about 147,000 NPEs over time. The increase in the NPE share since 1990 in 2017. Since 1995, Asia and North America have has been more gradual at the USPTO and reached a experienced annual growth rates of 11.5% and 7.9%, lower level (38.8%) than that found in other selected respectively, and, together, accounted for 70.5% of offices in 2017. total non-resident NPEs. Africa, Europe, LAC and Oceania have also experienced an overall increase in Of the selected offices of middle-income countries, the number of non-resident NPEs since 1995, but each all received more than three-quarters of their non- received fewer non-resident NPEs in 2017 than in 2015. resident filings though the PCT route in 2017, except for the National Intellectual Property Administration North America, which is the main destination for fil- of the People’s Republic of China (CNIPA) (58.7%). It ings made through the Paris route, with nearly 197,000 is likely that the NPE share either stagnated (Brazil) or non-resident applications filed in 2017, is the only decreased at all the selected offices of middle-income region to have received more non-resident applica- countries between 2010 and 2017 due to the high usage tions through the Paris route than through the PCT made of the PCT route since 2010. This was also the route. It was followed by Asia (114,292) and Europe case for the offices of Australia and Canada, among (58,755). Over the past two decades, the number of high-income group countries. direct non-resident filings has tended to decline in

15 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 SPECIAL THEME

S9. Trends in non-resident patent applications by filing route and region, 1995–2017

PCT NPEs Paris route

250,000 250,000

200,000 200,000

150,000 150,000

100,000 100,000

50,000 route) (Paris 50,000 Non-resident PCT Non-resident national phase entries national Non-resident patent applications patent Non-resident 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Application year Application year

AFRICA AFRICA ASIAASIA EUROPE LATIN AMERICA AND THEAFRICA CARIBBEAN NORTHASIA AMERICA OCEANIA EUROPE LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN EUROPE LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN Note:NORTH Data AMERICAmay be incomplete.OCEANIA NORTH AMERICA OCEANIA Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

S10. Share of PCT NPEs in non-resident filings per region, 1995–2017

40 Share (%) Share

0 Africa Asia Europe LAC North America Oceania World Region

Note: Data may be incomplete. LAC is Latin America and the Caribbean. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

16 40 YEARS OF THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY SPECIAL THEME

S11. Share of PCT NPEs in non-resident filings at selected offices

High-income

100

60 Share (%) Share 40

0 High-income Australia Canada EPO Japan Republic of Korea U.S. Office 1980 1990 2000 2010 2017

Middle-income

100

60 Share (%) Share 40

0 Middle-income Brazil China India Mexico Russian Federation South Africa Office 1980 1990 2000 2010 2017

Note: Data are missing for some years and offices. Data for South Africa refer to 2001, 2011 and 2017. EPO is the European Patent Office. The data for calculating the EPO shares in 1980 and 1990 come from the EPO database based on the March 2019 status. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

17 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 SPECIAL THEME

S12. Distribution of total PCT NPEs by office and income group, 1995–2017

China 11.2%

EPO Japan Canada 17.4% 11.2% 6.6%

Russian Federation 2.1% Brazil 3.8%

Others 1.9% South Others Africa 1.4% Republic of Korea 1.1% 6.3%

New Mexico Singapore Zealand 2.6% 1.5% 1% Malaysia EAPO U.S. 0.5% 0.5% 17.1%

Others Israel Norway 1.1% 1% 0.7% India Australia 4.1% 4.4% Indonesia Ukraine Germany U.K. 0.7% 0.5% 0.8% 0.5%

HIGH-INCOME, 70.4% UPPER MIDDLE-INCOME, 23.1% LOWER MIDDLE-INCOME, 6.4% LOW-INCOME, 0.1%

Note: EAPO is the Eurasian Patent Organization and EPO is the European Patent Office. Data may be incomplete. Limited PCT NPE data are available before 1995. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

18 40 YEARS OF THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY SPECIAL THEME

The destinations of PCT NPEs Since 1978, the four technology fields to have appeared the most in PCT applications were computer tech- When considering all NPEs initiated worldwide – res- nology, medical technology, electrical apparatus ident and non-resident – between 1995 and 2017, the and digital communication. Of the top 10 technology vast majority (70.4%) were received by the offices in fields, digital communication (+26%), pharmaceuticals high-income countries (see figure S12). Offices in upper (+19.7%) and computer technology (+19.6%) have seen middle-income countries received 23.1% of total NPEs, the highest average annual growth. followed by offices of lower middle-income (6.4%) and low-income (0.1%) countries. Panasonic is the top filer over the past 40 years, closely followed by Huawei, which only started filing The offices to have received the largest proportions PCT applications in 2000. Of the top 10 applicants of total NPEs since 1995 were the EPO (17.4%), the over this period, seven featured among the top 10 USPTO (17.1%), CNIPA (11.2%) and the JPO (11.2%); in 2018, and all were primarily active in the electrical combined, they accounted for the majority of NPEs engineering sector. initiated worldwide. Several offices from middle-income countries other than the CNIPA received notable shares Since 2007, Asia and North America have been the two of total NPEs. This was the case for the offices of main destinations of non-resident NPEs. Between 1995 India (4.1%), Brazil (3.8%), Mexico (2.6%), the Russian and 2017, applicants used the PCT route for almost half Federation (2.1%) and South Africa (1.1%). (49.5%) of total non-resident applications. This share is highest for Oceania (74.8%) and lowest for North America (33.8%). Conclusion Among a selection of patent offices, long-term trends Since the PCT entered into force in 1978, the number show that applicants have sharply increased their use of its member States has increased sharply from 13 to of the PCT System over time, especially so up until 152 in 2018. About 80% of the world’s countries have 2010. Between 2010 and 2017, the share of NPEs in joined the System, and 90% of high-income countries. total non-resident filings decreased at seven of the 12 In 2018, countries from the high-income (35.5%) and selected offices, most likely due to their already high upper middle-income (26.3%) categories accounted percentage levels. for the largest proportions of total member States. When considering all NPEs initiated worldwide between The number of PCT applications filed over the past 40 1995 and 2017, offices of high-income (70.4%) and years has likewise grown markedly. It took 26 years to upper middle-income (23.1%) countries were the main reach one million applications and only an estimated destinations, among which the CNIPA, the EPO, the 16 more are needed before the four millionth PCT fil- JPO and the USPTO each received more than 10% ing mark is reached. Applicants from Asia, Europe of total NPEs. Among offices of middle-income coun- and North America have each filed slightly more than tries, Brazil, India, Mexico, the Russian Federation and 1.2 million PCT applications since 1978. The U.S. South Africa also received substantial proportions of (31.1%), Japan (17.3%) and Germany (10.4%), com- total NPEs. bined, account for the bulk of total filing activity. China has seen its share of PCT filings rise steeply over the past 40 years, up to 21.1% in 2018.

19 20 Section A Statistics on the international phase: PCT applications

Highlights

A new record An estimated 253,000 international patent applications (PCT applications) were is set for the filed under WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) in 2018 (see figure A1). This number of PCT represents an annual growth of 3.9% and a ninth consecutive year of growth. applications filed Altogether, about 3.7 million PCT applications have been filed since the PCT System became operational in 1978 (see Special theme). Over the past 40 years, PCT filings have grown every year except for 2009, when the global financial crisis led to an economic downturn.

Applicants from In 2018, 152 states were members of the PCT and applicants from 127 countries 127 different in six geographical regions filed PCT applications at 84 receiving offices (ROs). countries filed Despite this wide geographical spread, most filing activity is concentrated in a PCT applications small number of economies.

Combined, the top 10 ROs accounted for 93.8% of applications received in 2018. With 55,330 filings and 55,211 filings, respectively, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the National Intellectual Property Administration of the People’s Republic of China (CNIPA) received the highest numbers of PCT applications. They were followed by the Japan Patent Office (JPO) (48,630), the European Patent Office (EPO) (37,975), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) (17,002) and the International Bureau (IB) of WIPO (12,259) (see figure A4).

Applicants from Applicants residing in the United States of America (U.S.) filed the most PCT the U.S. remained applications in 2018, with 56,142 applications. U.S. applicants were followed by the largest users applicants from China (53,345), Japan (49,702), Germany (19,883) and the Republic of the PCT System of Korea (17,014) (see figure A7). Combined, the top five countries accounted for 77.5% of all PCT applications filed in 2018. Driven mainly by a rapid increase in filings by applicants from China and Japan, the combined share of the top five has increased every year since 2009, when it was 69.2%.

The top 20 origins included 17 high-income countries – mostly European – and three middle-income countries, namely, China, India (2,013 applications) and Turkey (1,578) (see figure A8). Outside the top 20 origins, other large middle-income economies with notable numbers of PCT applications were the Russian Federation (963), Brazil (619), Mexico (274) and South Africa (274). Applicants from low-income countries filed a total of 16 PCT applications in 2018. Within this category, applicants from Senegal (4), the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (2) and the United Republic of Tanzania (2) accounted for the highest numbers of applications (see table A28).

Compared to 2017, 15 of the top 20 origins filed more PCT applications in 2018. The three countries to record double-digit increases were India (+27.2%), Turkey (+26.1%) and Finland (+14.7%). With a 9.1% growth rate in 2018, China experienced its nineteenth consecutive year of growth, but the first one not to have been in double-digits during this period. The Republic of Korea (+8%) and Japan (+3.1%) both saw solid growth also. The five countries within the top 20 list to experience decreases were the Netherlands (−6.6%), Australia (−1.5%), France (−1.2%), the U.S. (−0.9%) and Spain (−0.6%).

21 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

Among the large middle-income economies not to feature among the top 20 origins, the Islamic Republic of Iran (+100%), Colombia (+14%) and Ukraine (+10.6%) exhibited a sharp increase in PCT applications filed, whereas Thailand (−32.7%), the Russian Federation (−9%) and South Africa (−7.1%) saw large decreases in filings.

The majority For the first time since the PCT System came into force in 1978, applicants origi- of PCT filings nating from a single region accounted for the majority of filings. Countries located originated in Asia accounted for 50.5% of all PCT applications in 2018. Applicants in Europe from Asia (24.5%) and North America (23.1%) also made a substantial proportion of the filings. The combined share for Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and Oceania amounted to 1.7% of total PCT filings. Asia’s share has increased every year since 1993 and has grown from 28.9% in 2008 to 50.5% in 2018, primarily due to increases in filings from China, Japan and the Republic of Korea (see figure A3).

The business sector In 2018, the IB published almost 237,400 PCT applications filed by 54,341 appli- accounted for cants. This represents a 6.2% increase in published applications on 2017. The about 85% of all business sector accounted for 85.3% of all published PCT applications, followed PCT applications by individuals (7.5%), the university sector (5.4%) and the government and public research organization (PRO) sector (1.9%) (see figure A11).

The business sector accounted for the majority of published applications in each of the top 20 origins from the high-income group. The business sector share was particularly high for Sweden (97.6%) and Japan (95.8%). Of the top 20 origins from the middle-income category, the business sector accounted for the majority of published applications in seven countries and individual applicants filed the most in eight countries. In the Islamic Republic of Iran (93.3%) and Egypt (91.4%), individual applicants accounted for the vast majority of published applications (see figure A12).

The university sector accounted for a particularly high proportion of applications in Ecuador (68.2%), Morocco (52.5%) and Colombia (47.1%). It also accounted for high shares among several high-income economies, such as Singapore (19.7%), Spain (13.6%) and Israel (12%). Governments and PROs were responsible for a relatively high proportion of applications originating from Singapore (16.6%), France (8.7%) and Spain (5.2%). Of the top 20 middle-income origins, India (3.7%), South Africa (3.4%) and Malaysia (3.4%) had the highest shares of applications from the government and PRO sector.

Huawei remained In 2018, Huawei Technologies of China was the top PCT applicant among the the top PCT business sector, for the fourth time since 2014 (see table A15). With 5,405 pub- applicant lished PCT applications, Huawei Technologies became the first company to have had more than 5,000 PCT applications published within the period of a year. With 2,812 published PCT applications, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation of Japan moved up two spots to rank second thanks to an increase of 291 published applications compared to 2017. These two companies were followed by Intel Corporation (2,499) and Qualcomm Incorporated (2,404), both U.S.-based companies.

ZTE Corporation of China (2,080), which ranked second in 2017, moved down three positions. Sony Semiconductor Solutions Corporation of Japan was the company that climbed the most places in the top 50 ranking, up 304 places. Other sharp climbs in the ranking came from SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd of China (+52 positions), Nokia Technologies Oy of Finland (+24) and Guang Dong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd of China (+23).

22 SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE

The top 50 applicants list for 2018 is composed of applicants from 10 origins. Japan had 16 of the top applicants, followed by the U.S. (12), China (8), Germany (5) and the Republic of Korea (3) and the Netherlands (2). Finland, France, Sweden and Switzerland had each one applicant within this list.

Companies active in digital communication head the list of top 50 PCT filers in 2018. Of the top 10 applicants, seven filed mainly in digital communication, namely, Ericsson, Huawei Technologies, Intel Corporation, LG Electronics, Qualcomm Incorporated, Samsung Electronics and ZTE Corporation (see table A16).

Of the top 10 With 501 published PCT applications, the University of California remained the universities, five largest user of the PCT System among educational institutions in 2018 (see table are from the A17). The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (216) retained its second spot, U.S. and four despite a drop in published applications of 63 compared to 2017. It was followed from China by the Shenzhen University (201), the South China University of Technology (170) and Harvard University (169).

This is the first time that Chinese universities have ranked among the top 10. Universities based in the U.S. have traditionally largely dominated the top 10 ranking. In 2018, only half of the top 10 universities were located in the U.S., four were from China and one from the Republic of Korea. Of the top 50 universities, 23 were located in the U.S., 10 in China, 6 in the Republic of Korea, 5 in Japan, 2 in Singapore and 1 each in India, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom (U.K.).

Fraunhofer- With 345 published applications, the German-based Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Gesellschaft Förderung der angewandten Forschung heads the list of the top 30 government and became the top PRO applicants in 2018, followed by the China Academy of Telecommunications PCT applicant in Technology (303) (see table A18). These two PROs overtook the Commissariat à the government l’Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives (289) of France, which had been and PRO sector the top filer for seven consecutive years until 2017.

Applicants from 12 countries are represented in the top 30 list for 2018. The Republic of Korea (8) had the highest number of applicants, followed by the U.S. (6) and China (4).

Digital Digital communication (20,271) regained the top position that it held in 2016 by communication being the most frequently featured technology field in published PCT applications became the main in 2018. It was followed by computer technology (19,152), electrical machinery, field of technology apparatus, energy (16,577), medical technology (15,826) and transport (10,867) (see in PCT applications table A20). These top five fields of technology, combined, accounted for more than one third (34.9%) of all published PCT applications made in 2018.

The number of published PCT applications grew for each of the 35 fields of technology, except for micro-structural and nano-technology (–7%) and basic materials chemistry (–1.3%). Of the top 10 technology fields, transport (+11.3%), digital communication (+10.1%) and semiconductors (+9.8%) saw the sharpest growth on 2017.

23 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

Only 17.1% of In 2018, women accounted for 17.1% of all inventors listed in PCT applications and inventors listed in men the remaining 82.9% (see figure A22). The share of women inventors increased PCT applications by almost 0.8 percentage points compared to 2017 (16.4%). Since 2005, this share were women has continuously increased, from 11.8% to 17.1%. Moreover, the share of women inventors has increased in each of the world’s geographical regions over the past five years, except for Africa (13.1%), where it decreased slightly by 0.5 percentage points. The LAC region (23.6%) had the highest share of women among PCT inventors and was followed by Asia (19.8%), Oceania (16.1%), North America (15.9%) and Europe (13.4%) (see figure A24).

About 94% of PCT applications named at least one man as inventor in 2018, and 32.6% named at least one woman as inventor (see figure A23). The share of PCT applications with at least one woman as inventor has risen from 22.4% in 2004 to 32.6% in 2018, while the share for inventors who are men decreased within the same period from 97.1% to 94.3%.

The gender gap among PCT inventors varies considerably across countries. Within the top 20 origins, China (28.9%), the Republic of Korea (26.8%) and Spain (24.4%) had the highest shares of inventors who were women in 2018 (see figure A25). These three were the only origins among the top 20 to have more than one-fifth of all inventors being women. Conversely, Germany (10.3%), Japan (10.1%) and Austria (9.4%) had the lowest shares among the top 20 origins.

Fields of technology related to the life sciences had comparatively high shares of women among PCT inventors (see figure A26). Women represented more than a quarter of inventors listed in PCT applications in the fields of biotechnology (29.9%), pharmaceuticals (29.2%), food chemistry (28.6%), analysis of biological materials (26.5%) and organic fine chemistry (26.1%). Women accounted for more than a third of inventors listed in PCT applications relating to pharmaceuticals filed by applicants residing in France (37.4%), China (36.5%) and the Republic of Korea (35.2%) (see figure A27).

Global trends in PCT applications A1 Trend in filings of PCT applications, 2004–2018 27 A2 Distribution of PCT applications by income group, 2008 and 2018 27 A3 Distribution of PCT applications by region, 2008 and 2018 28

PCT applications by receiving office A4 PCT applications for the top 20 receiving offices, 2018 28 A5 PCT applications for selected receiving offices of low- and middle-income countries, 2018 29

PCT applications by origin A6 PCT applications by origin, 2018 29 A7 Trend in PCT applications for the top five origins, 1978–2018 30 A8 PCT applications for the top 20 origins, 2018 30 A9 PCT applications for the top countries by region, 2016–2018 31 A10 Conversion ratio of direct resident patent applications to PCT applications for the top 20 origins, 2018 32

PCT applications by applicant type A11 Distribution of PCT applications by applicant type, 2004–2018 32 A12 Distribution of PCT applications by applicant type for the top 20 origins by income group, 2018 33 A13 Share of PCT applications with business and public sector co-applicants for the top 20 origins, 2018 34 A14 Share of PCT applications with foreign co-applicants for the top 20 origins, 2018 34

Top PCT applicants A15 Top 50 business PCT applicants, 2016–2018 35 A16 Share of technology fields for the top 10 business applicants, 2018 36 A17 Top 50 university PCT applicants, 2016–2018 37 A18 Top 30 government and PRO PCT applicants, 2016–2018 38 A19 Share of the top three technology fields for the top five universities and PROs, 2018 39

PCT applications by fields of technology A20 PCT applications by field of technology, 2014–2018 40 A21 Relative specialization index for published PCT applications by selected fields of technology, 2018 41

Participation of women inventors in PCT applications A22 Share of women among listed inventors in PCT applications, 2004–2018 43 A23 Share of PCT applications with at least one woman as inventor and with at least one man as inventor, 2004–2018 43 A24 Share of women among listed inventors in PCT applications by geographical region, 2008, 2013 and 2018 44 A25 Share of women among listed inventors and share of PCT applications with at least one woman as inventor for the top 20 origins, 2018 44 A26 Share of women among listed inventors in PCT applications by field of technology, 2018 45 A27 Share of women among listed inventors in PCT applications for the top 10 origins by field of technology, 2018 46

Statistical table A28 PCT applications by office and origin, 2017–2018 47

26 SECTION A 27 3.9 2018 4.6 77.2% High-income 21.8% Upper middle-income 0.8% Lower middle-income 0.0% Low-income 0.2% Unknown 2017 7.2 2016 1.4 2015 4.4 2014 SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: 2018 5.1 2013 7.1 2012 11.0 2011 5.8 2010 International filing year filing International –4.8 2009 96.4% High-income 2.6% Upper middle-income 0.8% Lower middle-income 0.0% Low-income 0.2% Unknown 2.1 2008 6.9 2007 9.4 2006 GROWTH RATE (%) 11.5 2005 2008 6.5 2004 250,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000

PCT APPLICATIONS PCT applications PCT Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. description. Data annex, see classification, Each group income income on information For group includes the (11). following low-income and number (21) middle-income of lower origins:(36), high-income (58), upper middle-income Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A2. Distribution of PCT applications income by group, 2008 and 2018 Upper middle-incomeUpper countries seen their have share increase sharply the past over decade. Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. The total PCT number applications of grew in by 3.9% 2018. in filings Trend of PCT applications,2004–2018 A1. Global trends in trends applications PCT Global

654 –1.5 Singapore 1.7 917

50.5% Asia 24.5% Europe 23.1% America North 0.8% Oceania 0.7% LAC 0.2% Africa 0.2% Unknown Netherlands

920 21.4 India

948 –6.0 Spain ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%) 993 –12.3

2.8

1,007

Finland Russian Federation Russian 44.5 1,292

2018 Turkey

–0.6 1,406 Sweden

–9.2 1,430 Germany

1.4

1,437 Israel

–4.4 1,675 Australia Receiving office

2.1

1,914 Canada

–6.5

3,555

28.9% Asia 35.2% Europe 33.4% America North 1.4% Oceania 0.7% LAC 0.3% Africa 0.1% Unknown France –1.2 U.K. 3,887 20.2 12,259 7.7

17,002 International Bureau International

3.7

37,975 EPO Republic of Korea of Republic 2.5 2008

48,630 Japan 9.0

55,211 China

–1.7 U.S.

55,330 PCT applications PCT Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. EPO is the European Patent Office and CNIPA is the National China. of Republic IntellectualPeople’s Property Administration of the Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. The USPTO and the CNIPA each received around 55,000 PCT applications in 2018. A4. PCT applications for the receiving top 20 offices,2018 PCT applications by receiving by applications PCT office Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. Each region includes the following number of offices: andAfrica the Caribbean (22), Asia (34), Europe (LAC) (42), Latin (22), North America America (2) and Oceania (4). Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Asia accounted the bulk for PCT applications of filed in 2018. A3. Distribution of PCT applications region, by 2008 and 2018 28 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 29 3

–25.0 Indonesia 4 –50.0 5

–44.4

Georgia Dominican Republic Dominican 14 40.0

ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%) Philippines 15

–44.4 Kazakhstan 16

–23.8 Romania SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A:

60.0 Algeria

11.1 Serbia

–4.3 Belarus 26

116.7 Colombia

11.4 Peru Receiving office

20.0 Egypt

44 2.3 Morocco

27.0 Bulgaria 61

–33.0 Thailand 67

–30.9 South Africa South

7.0 138 Malaysia

9.2 143 Ukraine

196 –1.0 Mexico

2.0 570

Brazil PCT applications PCT 10,000–69,999 1,000–9,999 100–999 10–99 1–9 NO DATA Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. PCT applications are highly concentrated among origins. a few A6. PCT applications origin, by 2018 PCT applications by origin by applications PCT Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. The selected offices are from different world regionsincome andand income upper middle-income).groups (low-income, Where lower available,middle- data for all offices are presented in statistical table A28. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A5. PCT applications for selected receiving offices of low- and middle-income countries,2018 The office Brazil of PCT applications received 570 in 2018.

–0.6

1,409 2018 Spain

0.9 2016

1,443 Denmark 2014

5.6

1,475 Austria 2012

26.1 1,578 Turkey ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%) 2010

–1.5 1,825 Australia 2008

14.7 1,836 Finland 2006

4.6

1,899 Israel 2004

27.2 2,013 India 2002 0.9

2,422

2000 Canada

3.5 1998 Italy 3,337 Origin 1996 –6.6 4,138

International filing year filing International Netherlands 1994

4.7

4,162 Sweden 1992 1.8 4,568

REPUBLIC OF KOREA 1990 Switzerland

1.3 5,641 U.K. 1988

–1.2 7,914 France 1986 8.0 GERMANY 17,014 1984 4.9

19,883

1982 Republic of Korea of Republic Germany JAPAN 3.1

1980 49,702 Japan 9.1

1978

53,345 China

CHINA –0.9 U.S. 56,142 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000

U.S. PCT applications PCT PCT applications PCT Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Applicants residing in China, Japan and the U.S. filed by far PCT the applications most 2018. in A8.PCT applications for the origins, top 20 2018 Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. U.S.-based applicants filed have the largest PCT number applications of every year since the PCT System came into in force 1978. in PCT applications Trend for the top five origins,1978–2018 A7. 30 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 31 7.3 7.0 1.4 1.8 1.8 1.3 1.5 9.1 4.3 4.6 4.9 4.7 0.9 0.0 5.1 3.1 5.6 8.0 3.5 3.9 2.0 n.a. –7.1 17.1 –1.5 –1.2 –1.2 –7.7 27.2 –1.0 74.9 14.0 14.7 15.2 16.7 22.2 22.7 –0.9 26.1 –0.6 –6.6 46.7 –0.9 43.3 68.4 28.0 –27.5 –32.7 1,955.6 2017 (%) Change from Change 7.4 1.5 1.6 1.2 2.3 2.1 2.4 2.3 9.1 4.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.4 4.4 0.7 0.1 5.2 5.2 5.4 3.0 6.7 6.7 8.9 0.2 0.8 0.7 n.a. n.a. 11.3 41.7 12.8 14.9 12.2 15.2 13.3 13.2 10.2 13.3 10.1 32.1 95.9 63.3 38.9 33.7 86.7 24.5 50.5 23.1 2018 (%) Regional share Regional 2 SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: 81 42 49 44 38 66 96 96 274 274 619 143 278 185 105 163 245 661 289 485 930 433 2018 7,914 4,162 4,138 1,475 2,013 7,532 1,578 1,825 5,641 1,409 2,422 1,899 1,836 2,105 3,337 4,568 1,839 17,014 56,142 49,702 19,883 53,345 61,895 58,564 127,875 253,000 2 9 47 91 57 67 36 33 36 66 141 414 167 156 143 378 270 273 244 867 295 589 469 2017 1,418 7,624 1,816 1,251 8,014 1,601 1,397 1,852 3,975 2,127 1,583 2,400 4,488 3,225 4,430 5,568 1,437 15,751 18,951 56,676 59,076 48,205 48,905 60,691 119,467 243,511 Year of international filing filing international of Year 3 24 91 59 35 46 44 60 114 197 155 189 287 100 307 567 289 294 208 345 864 425 2016 3,719 1,528 1,525 1,422 1,507 4,675 8,210 2,145 1,835 1,838 1,065 6,981 2,336 5,504 3,362 4,369 1,488 18,307 15,555 56,591 43,091 45,209 59,581 58,927 110,133 232,907 Name South Africa South Morocco Thailand Egypt Others Malaysia New Zealand Others Total* China Israel Japan Republic of Korea India Total* Australia Saudi Arabia Saudi Singapore Others Turkey Total* Germany France Kingdom United Total* Switzerland Sweden Canada Netherlands United States of America Chile Peru Others Brazil Mexico Panama Total* Italy Colombia Barbados Barbuda and Antigua Argentina Others Total* Finland Austria Spain Region Africa

Asia

Oceania

Europe

Unknown Total

North America Latin America and Caribbean the

* indicates share of world total. n.a. indicates not applicable. Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. This table shows the top countries in each region (with a maximumapplicants countries of 10 filed permore region) than 20 PCT whose applications in 2018. Data for all origins are reported in statistical table A28. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A9. PCTA9. applications for the top countries region, by 2016–2018 With growth 28%, of Latin America and the Caribbean the saw steepest increase in filings among all geographical regions in 2018.

0.04 China 85.3 2018 0.11 84.7 2017

0.14 India Republic of Korea of Republic 85.3 2016

0.18 Turkey BUSINESS SECTOR SHARE (%)

0.21

85.1 2015

Japan 0.22 U.S.

85.1 2014 0.31 Italy 84.9 2013

0.33 Germany

84.3 2012

0.38 U.K. 0.42

83.3 2011 France Origin

0.45

Publication year Publication Spain 83.1 2010

0.52 Austria 83.3 2009

0.55

GOVERNMENT/PRO Denmark

0.68

83.4 2008 Netherlands 0.81

83.5 2007 Switzerland UNIVERSITY

0.82 Finland 83.1 2006

0.97 Canada 83.0 2005 1.25

INDIVIDUAL Australia 1.32

82.3 2004 Sweden

2.22 0 Israel 75 50 25 100

BUSINESS Distribution (%) Distribution PCT to resident filings ratio (%) ratio filings resident to PCT Note: The government and public research organizations (PROs) sector includessector private non-profit includes all organizations educational institutions. and hospitals. For confidentialityThe university reasons, data are based on the publication date. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. PCT applications by applicant type applicant by applications PCT The business sector accounted 85.3% for all of PCT applications filed in 2018. Distribution of PCT applications applicant by A11. type, 2004–2018 Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. This hypothetical “conversion ratio” reflects the proportionconverted intoof direct PCT applications. resident patent The ratioapplications is defined for the top 20 origins in terms of PCT applicationsapplications filed (including in2018 divided by regionalresident applications patent and excluding PCT national phasebetween entries) 0 and However,In theory, it 1. may filed exceed the because in 2017. conversion 1, some applicationsratio should be do not have priority claims associatedexample, an with applicant prior resident from Israel filings. may forego For filing an application at the Israel Patentthen Office convert thatand opt to prior file a filingfirst intoapplication a PCT application. at the USPTO, Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. China, patent rates India resident of conversion and low the have Korea Republic of applications to PCT applications compared to European origins. Conversion ratio of directA10. resident patent applications PCT to applications for the origins, top 20 2018 32 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 33

4.2

58.7

Singapore Kazakhstan

5.7

58.9

Spain Egypt

6.7

70.3 Australia

72.1 10.7

Israel

Ukraine

BUSINESS SECTOR SHARE (%) of) Republic (Islamic Iran BUSINESS SECTOR SHARE (%) 75.0 13.3 Peru Canada

76.2 13.6 Ecuador

SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: 80.4 Italy 17.3

Republic of Korea of Republic

Colombia

83.4 U.K. 25.0 Morocco

84.0 25.0

Austria Romania

84.2 36.3

France Mexico

Origin Origin

85.0 U.S. 39.8 South Africa South

87.7 44.8 Belgium High-income group High-income

Middle-income group Middle-income

87.8 48.3

Norway

Malaysia Russian Federation Russian GOVERNMENT/PRO GOVERNMENT/PRO

90.9 52.1

Brazil Denmark

91.1 57.4

Bulgaria Germany

92.8 57.6 India

UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY Switzerland

93.4 61.9

Finland Viet Nam Viet

94.0 72.8

Thailand Netherlands

INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL

95.8 73.1

Japan Turkey

97.6 80.9

China Sweden 0 0 75 50 25 75 50 25 100 100

BUSINESS BUSINESS Distribution (%) Distribution Distribution (%) Distribution Note: The government and PROs sector includes private non-profitdate. publication the on and applications organizationspublished on based are data reasons, confidentiality For institutions. and hospitals. The university sector includes all educational Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A12. Distribution of PCT applicationsA12. applicant by type for the origins top 20 income by group, 2018 More than PCT applications of More 95% originating in and Sweden Japan filed were by businesses. 0.1

0.4 –0.0

–1.3 Sweden 0.4 0.4

0.8

–3.3

China Austria Republic of Korea of Republic 0.5 0.1

1.2

–4.9

Sweden Germany

0.6

1.3 –0.2 0.4

Japan Switzerland 0.6 0.5

1.5

–3.8 India Finland

0.7

1.6 –2.2

–0.1 Italy China PERCENTAGE POINT CHANGE OVER 2004 PERCENTAGE POINT CHANGE OVER 2004

0.7

2.0 –0.0

India –0.3 Australia 0.8 0.5

2.3

–0.5

Denmark Netherlands

0.8 0.3

2.5

U.K. –1.4 Germany

0.9

0.3

2.5 1.2 U.S. Austria Origin Origin

1.1

2.9 0.6

–0.7 U.S. Australia

1.2

0.8 3.7 0.3

Spain Denmark 1.2

0.2 4.2

–0.3

France Canada 1.3

0.3 5.2

–3.4 Israel

1.3

0.6 5.8

–0.9 U.K. Israel Republic of Korea of Republic

1.5 0.4 5.8 1.7

Japan Canada

2.0 1.3 6.9

Italy –4.8 Switzerland

4.3 1.6 8.0

–3.3

Belgium Netherlands

6.7 3.3 9.9 2.8

Spain Belgium

7.7 5.1

11.7 –1.6

France Finland

Share (%) Share Share (%) Share Note: Counts are based on corporate applicants onlydate. publication (excludingthe on and applications naturalpublished on based are data persons) reasons, confidentiality For applicant). andnamed first on all applicants named in PCT applications (not only the Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A14. Share of PCT applicationsA14. with foreign co-applicants for the origins, top 20 2018 A relatively high proportion PCT applications of filed by applicants residing in Belgium, Finland and the Netherlands foreign included co-applicants. Note: The public sector comprises the universityon based are data sector reasons, confidentiality For andinstitutions. the educational government all includes sector university The hospitals. and and organizations PROsnon-profit sector. The government and PROs sector includes private date. publication the on and applications published Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Belgium, France and Spain exhibit comparatively a high collaboration of level between the business and public sectors. Share of PCT applicationsA13. with business and public sector co-applicants for the origins, top 20 2018 34 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 35 417 414 419 413 714 513 613 947 551 750 729 557 661 467 407 656 582 442 962 998 504 450 836 889 648 969 463 446 634 395 406 390 1,170 1,132 1,211 1,813 1,476 2,812 1,524 1,697 1,997 1,042 1,465 1,645 1,342 1,033 2,404 2,499 5,405 2,080 2018 69 411 474 414 241 315 318 970 972 678 421 377 789 277 323 923 850 556 934 408 899 560 684 489 503 963 968 566 488 338 330 808 290 360 2,163 1,757 1,519 1,818 1,735 1,077 2,521 4,024 2,637 1,945 1,564 1,354 1,280 1,536 1,063 2,965 2017 57 80 50 86 415 172 312 310 197 671 624 681 267 587 427 359 598 986 209 365 653 968 450 406 396 336 383 344 1,137 1,138 1,189 4,123 1,103 1,743 1,163 1,274 1,672 1,673 1,047 1,528 1,077 1,692 Published PCT applications applications PCT Published 1,056 1,888 1,608 1,665 1,205 2,053 2,466 3,692 2016 SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: Origin China Japan U.S. U.S. China Republic of Korea China Republic of Korea Sweden Germany U.S. Japan Japan Germany U.S. China Netherlands Japan Japan Republic of Korea Japan Japan Japan U.S. Japan U.S. Japan China China U.S. U.S. Germany Japan Japan Japan Germany U.S. Finland China Japan Netherlands Japan Switzerland U.S. Germany Japan U.S. France China U.S. Applicant HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION ELECTRIC MITSUBISHI INTEL CORPORATION INTEL QUALCOMM INCORPORATED QUALCOMM ZTE CORPORATION ZTE SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. CO., ELECTRONICS SAMSUNG BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO.,LTD LG ELECTRONICS INC. ELECTRONICS LG TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL) ERICSSON LM TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET ROBERT BOSCH CORPORATION BOSCH ROBERT MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC LICENSING, MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY PANASONIC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT PROPERTY INTELLECTUAL PANASONIC CO., LTD. SONY CORPORATION SONY SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFTSIEMENS HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P. COMPANY, DEVELOPMENT HEWLETT-PACKARD GUANG DONG OPPO MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TELECOMMUNICATIONS MOBILE OPPO DONG GUANG LTD CORP., N.V. ELECTRONICS PHILIPS KONINKLIJKE SHARP KABUSHIKI KAISHASHARP CORPORATION DENSO CHEM,LG LTD. CORPORATION FUJIFILM NEC CORPORATION NEC MURATA MANUFACTURING CO., LTD. CO., MANUFACTURING MURATA GOOGLE INC. GOOGLE OLYMPUS CORPORATION OLYMPUS COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC HITACHI, LTD. HITACHI, TENCENT TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) COMPANY LIMITED COMPANY (SHENZHEN) TECHNOLOGY TENCENT SZ DJI TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY PROPERTIES INNOVATIVE 3M HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC. SERVICES, ENERGY HALLIBURTON SCHAEFFLER TECHNOLOGIES AG & CO. KG HONDA MOTOR CO., LTD. CORPORATION SOLUTIONS SEMICONDUCTOR SONY HITACHI AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS, LTD. SYSTEMS, AUTOMOTIVE HITACHI SE BASF PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY GAMBLE & PROCTER NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY TECHNOLOGIES NOKIA SHENZHEN CHINA STAR OPTOELECTRONICS OPTOELECTRONICS STAR CHINA SHENZHEN TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD NTT DOCOMO, INC. SABIC GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES B.V. FUJITSU LIMITED FUJITSU ABB SCHWEIZ AG DOW GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. TECHNOLOGIES GLOBAL DOW BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT WERKE MOTOREN BAYERISCHE KYOCERA CORPORATION KYOCERA COMPAGNIE GÉNÉRALE DES ÉTABLISSEMENTS MICHELIN APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. MATERIALS, APPLIED WUHAN CHINA STAR OPTOELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY OPTOELECTRONICS STAR CHINA WUHAN CO., LTD APPLE INC. 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 4 0 3 3 5 1 5 2 6 3 4 0 5 2 8 0 0 –1 –2 –2 –2 19 –3 19 16 10 –3 19 24 –3 –4 23 –5 –4 –5 –3 –3 –4 –5 56 26 –22 304 position position from 2017 from Change in 1 Ranking 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 37 38 34 36 39 35 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 date. publication the on and applications published on based are data reasons, confidentiality For Note: Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A15. Top 50 business Top PCT applicants, A15. 2016–2018 Huawei Technologies set a new record a new set in the Technologies applications number of Huawei published by one applicant insingle a year. Top PCT applicants applicants PCT Top

-/.

-"%/1-0#( /)#00-,

*%#1/

%#(/-2.

!+02,'*%#1/

..*)#!,1 -/.

2!*#-++

,1%*-/.

) was used to convert IPC symbols into 35 corresponding fields of technology.

*%#1/

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ote: For confidentiality reasons, data are based on published applications concordanceand on the publication table (availabledate. WIPO's IPC technology at: www.wipo.int/ipstats Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. The bulk of PCT applications filed by Ericsson (74.4%), Huawei Technologies (59.9%), ZTE (59.9%), Technologies Huawei The bulk PCT applications of filed by Ericsson (74.4%), related to and digital Qualcomm (55.2%) communicationCorporation technologies. (59.6%) Share of technologyA16. fields10 business for thetop applicants,2018 36 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 37 74 81 75 76 87 78 61 70 70 70 79 72 79 79 72 92 94 52 52 59 59 99 89 86 58 62 58 58 56 49 68 55 48 48 53 64 53 63 66 114 170 121 137 216 137 158 169 105 201 501 2018 17 17 41 51 47 16 75 81 71 75 70 97 31 37 67 91 27 67 59 55 58 50 99 88 49 80 46 65 84 53 90 38 30 30 43 90 114 113 119 179 161 126 129 107 104 279 108 109 100 482 2017 3 17 14 47 15 47 19 97 87 87 37 87 37 37 72 72 67 73 67 42 50 32 56 65 49 94 62 84 84 56 56 54 45 22 30 64 30 34 44 60 96 101 122 158 155 104 163 108 236 434 Published PCT applications applications PCT Published 2016 SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: U.S. U.S. Origin China U.S. Japan U.S. Republic of Korea China U.S. Republic of Korea China China Japan U.S. Republic of Korea Japan Japan U.S. U.S. Arabia Saudi U.S. U.K. U.S. China Republic of Korea China U.S. Singapore U.S. U.S. Singapore U.S. China Japan Republic of Korea U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. Switzerland U.S. China China U.S. U.S. Republic of Korea U.S. India China MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY OF MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA OF UNIVERSITY Applicant SOUTH CHINA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF CHINA SOUTH OSAKA UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY HOPKINS JOHNS KOREA ADVANCED INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY HARVARD UNIVERSITY HARVARD SHENZHEN UNIVERSITY SHENZHEN UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS OF SYSTEM UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY NATIONAL SEOUL UNIVERSITY TSINGHUA CHINA UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO UNIVERSITY OF LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY JUNIOR LELAND STANFORD HANYANG UNIVERSITY HANYANG TOHOKU UNIVERSITY TOHOKU KYOTO UNIVERSITY KYOTO UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA OF UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA OF UNIVERSITY KING ABDULLAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANUNIVERSITY OF OXFORD UNIVERSITY INNOVATION LIMITED UNIVERSITY INNOVATION OXFORD CORNELL UNIVERSITYCORNELL PEKING UNIVERSITY PEKING KOREA UNIVERSITYKOREA JIANGNAN UNIVERSITY SINGAPORE UNIVERSITY OF NATIONAL DUKE UNIVERSITYDUKE NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGHUNIVERSITY OF NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGICAL NANYANG TECHNOLOGY OF INSTITUTE CALIFORNIA JIANGSU UNIVERSITYJIANGSU KYUSHU UNIVERSITY YONSEI UNIVERSITY YONSEI ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS, A BODY CORPORATE OF OF CORPORATE BODY A REGENTS, OF BOARD ARIZONA OFTHE ARIZONA, STATE ACTING FOR AND ON BEHALF UNIVERSITY STATE ARIZONA OF UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTSUNIVERSITY OF VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY VANDERBILT UNIVERSITYCOLUMBIA UNIVERSITY OF MARYLANDUNIVERSITY OF ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FÉDÉRALE DE LAUSANNE DE FÉDÉRALE POLYTECHNIQUE ÉCOLE CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY RESERVE WESTERN CASE DALIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY OF UNIVERSITY DALIAN SHANDONG UNIVERSITYSHANDONG UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY STATE CAROLINA NORTH RESEARCH & BUSINESS FOUNDATION FOUNDATION BUSINESS & RESEARCH SUNGKYUNKWAN UNIVERSITY STATE UNIVERSITYSTATE OF NEW YORK INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY OF INSTITUTE INDIAN UNIVERSITY YAT-SEN SUN 1 0 0 0 7 9 91 78 25 67 20 –5 37 –5 78 23 49 38 88 –12 –13 –77 –77 –26 –20 148 –22 192 103 –32 –35 –53 –49 –39 –93 –84 778 –86 –80 –46 268 292 455 836 893 303 306 –143 –214 –212 position position from 2017 from Change in 38 Ranking 273 108 119 158 181 181 145 242 259 147 280 211 219 294 300 304 332 324 332 338 348 332 351 355 379 365 379 390 400 365 379 410 413 431 425 440 440 449 449 449 465 480 494 494 505 535 505 552 552 Note: The university sector includes all types of educational institutions.on the For confidentiality publication date. reasons, data are based on published applications and Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A17. Top 50 university Top PCT applicants, 2016–2018 A17. Since the 1993, University California of has been the top PCT applicant the for sector. university 41 51 51 31 71 31 57 49 56 56 48 48 35 54 39 38 33 65 30 30 30 44 30 99 30 128 149 139 139 130 289 345 303 2018

41 41 41 14 51 75 61 37 25 25 79 26 23 22 29 62 46 39 46 36 45 36 53 69 66 142 143 134 103 199 279 204 300 2017 17 18 18 18 24 31 31 25 73 42 42 23 29 55 48 36 38 44 33 83 39 30 89 44 68 146 145 122 135 162 109 252 329 Published PCT applications PCT Published 2016 U.S. Australia Republic of Korea India Republic of Korea Netherlands China Germany Japan Republic of Korea U.S. U.S. U.S. Republic of Korea Germany Spain China Republic of Korea Japan Republic of Korea U.S. U.S. Republic of Korea Singapore China Republic of Korea France Japan Germany Origin Canada China France France UNITED OF AMERICA STATES AS REPRESENTED THE BY SECRETARY OF THE NAVY COMMONWEALTH SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL AND SCIENTIFIC COMMONWEALTH ORGANISATION RESEARCH KOREA RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH INDUSTRIAL AND SCIENTIFIC OF COUNCIL ELECTRONICS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS KOREA OF INSTITUTE DALIAN INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS, CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES DEUTSCHES ZENTRUM FÜR LUFT- UND RAUMFAHRT E.V. NEDERLANDSE ORGANISATIE VOOR TOEGEPAST- TNO ONDERZOEK NATUURWETENSCHAPPELIJK NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY COMMUNICATIONS KOREA INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIAL OF INSTITUTE KOREA SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RESEARCH CANCER FOR INSTITUTE SLOAN-KETTERING UNITED OF AMERICA, STATES AS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERIVCES INSTITUTE TECHNNOLOGY ELECTRONICS KOREA MAYO FOUNDATIONMAYO FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH MAX-PLANCK-GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FÖRDERUNG DER WISSENSCHAFTEN E.V. SHANGHAI INSTITUTE OF MATERIA MEDICA, CHINESE CHINESE MEDICA, MATERIA OF INSTITUTE SHANGHAI ACADEMY OF SCIENCES CONSEJO SUPERIOR DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTÍFICAS CIENTÍFICAS INVESTIGACIONES DE SUPERIOR CONSEJO (CSIC) KOREA INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE OF INSTITUTE KOREA RIKEN (THE INSTITUTE OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL RESEARCH) KOREA INSTITUTE OF MACHINERY & MATERIALS & MACHINERY OF INSTITUTE KOREA CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER MEDICAL CEDARS-SINAI KOREA RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF BIOSCIENCE AND BIOTECHNOLOGY SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE RESEARCH SCRIPPS SHENZHEN INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY ADVANCED OF INSTITUTE SHENZHEN AGENCY OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE, OF AGENCY KOREA ELECTROTECHNOLOGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE RESEARCH ELECTROTECHNOLOGY KOREA CENTRE NATIONAL DE LA RECHERCHE SCIENTIFIQUE SCIENTIFIQUE LA RECHERCHE DE NATIONAL CENTRE (CNRS) NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL ADVANCED OF INSTITUTE NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE FRAUNHOFER-GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FÖRDERUNG DER E.V. FORSCHUNG ANGEWANDTEN Applicant NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA OF COUNCIL RESEARCH NATIONAL COMMISSARIAT À L’ÉNERGIE ATOMIQUE ET AUX ÉNERGIES ALTERNATIVES INSTITUT NATIONAL DE LA SANTÉ ET DE LA RECHERCHE (INSERM) MÉDICALE CHINA ACADEMY OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS TELECOMMUNICATIONS OF ACADEMY CHINA TECHNOLOGY –7 18 91 37 77 56 93 63 174 –12 –16 115 119 –73 –21 197 –51 371 –31 –91 184 725 –34 –93 –36 –99 –54 –43 –193 –194 –227 –364 –438 position position from 2017 from Change in 535 516 552 516 552 684 696 758 488 465 374 406 652 603 797 465 460 259 865 865 841 841 865 865 201 196 175 57 Ranking 865 69 164 175 75 Note: The government and PRO sector includes private non-profit organizations date. publication the on and applications andpublished hospitals. For confidentiality reasons, data are based on Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft has become the top PCT applicant and the government for 30 government Top and PRO PCT applicants, A18. 2016–2018 PROs sector. sector. PROs 38 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A

INSERM Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft ) was used to convert IPC symbols into Public research organization Public

Biotechnology Measurement Basic communication processes communication Basic

China Academy of Tel. Tech. Tel. of Academy China

SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: CNRS CEA 0

100 Share of publications (%) publications of Share Organic fine chemistry fine Organic Optics Digital communication Digital

Applicant University of California of University

Medical technology Semiconductors Telecommunications South China Univ. of Tech. of Univ. China South

University

Shenzhen University Shenzhen MIT Pharmaceuticals Analysis of biological materials of Analysis Computer technology Computer Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy apparatus, machinery, Electrical

50 University Harvard

100 Share of publications (%) publications of Share Note: CEA is the Commissariat à l’Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives, CNRS is the CentreChina National Academy de Tech. is of la the Tel. Recherche China Academy Scientifique, of Telecommunications Technology, INSERM is the Institut National de la SantéRecherche et de la Médicale, MIT is the Massachusetts applications published on Institute based are data reasons, confidentiality For of Technology, hospitals. and and organizations the non-profit South private include China PROs Univ. of Tech. is the SouthTechnology. China University of and on the publication date. WIPO’s IPC technology concordance table (available at: www.wipo.int/ipstats technology. of corresponding fields 35 Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A19. Share of the top three technologyA19. fields for thetop five universities 2018 and PROs, Digital communication accounted the highest for shares PCT applications of two for the of top five PROs. 7.0 7.3 4.1 7.9 0.1 3.1 0.1 1.6 1.0 1.8 1.2 5.7 5.7 8.7 6.7 9.8 0.9 3.6 8.4 5.3 5.8 8.6 4.3 8.9 0.5 6.5 6.9 8.2 –7.0 –1.3 10.1 11.3 21.2 13.9 29.5 2017 (%) Change from from Change 7.0 2.1 8.1 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 0.7 6.7 1.2 1.2 2.4 2.6 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.0 4.6 2.3 2.9 2.5 4.6 2.3 3.0 8.6 0.9 0.8 2.2 3.8 3.5 0.2 3.2 2018 share (%) 360 9,114 6,174 7,180 2018 1,914 2,100 5,190 6,108 1,703 7,606 2,750 2,729 5,773 5,651 4,789 3,703 4,873 4,327 6,097 4,656 5,565 4,238 4,084 6,608 5,868 5,386 8,203 3,864 6,969 19,152 10,798 16,577 15,826 10,867 20,271 387 7,144 2017 6,110 6,417 1,315 6,104 4,674 3,917 7,534 3,616 1,957 1,891 8,759 9,760 4,705 3,576 2,601 5,626 5,623 6,537 2,646 5,640 5,499 4,283 5,683 6,550 4,406 4,992 3,586 4,090 19,137 18,416 15,031 10,087 15,245 369 2016 1,742 3,146 5,713 4,743 1,947 5,475 7,069 5,759 8,725 5,754 8,216 5,972 2,587 1,380 5,607 4,357 2,532 4,342 9,340 4,032 5,046 3,633 3,668 3,280 3,894 6,545 5,203 6,609 3,806 6,260 17,164 17,779 14,474 14,272 Publication year 359 2015 5,417 7,703 3,017 5,615 4,312 8,610 3,015 3,816 1,261 6,441 1,823 3,769 1,662 4,705 8,651 5,625 3,697 3,627 5,861 5,927 4,391 2,408 6,201 2,549 5,453 4,053 6,367 6,595 4,865 3,295 12,651 16,422 14,660 16,065 412 7,197 2014 3,140 5,716 1,841 3,814 1,879 2,771 3,781 6,010 3,773 5,981 5,437 5,377 2,291 1,296 8,601 5,901 4,228 9,035 8,667 6,494 3,496 4,068 4,609 6,836 5,883 4,004 4,800 3,008 6,906 17,757 16,217 14,036 15,294 ) was used to convert IPC symbols into 35 corresponding fields of technology. Medical technologyMedical Chemistry chemistry fine Organic Biotechnology Pharmaceuticals Control Macromolecular chemistry, polymers chemistry, Macromolecular Analysis of biological materials biological of Analysis chemistry materials Basic Instruments Optics chemistry Food Semiconductors Measurement metallurgy Materials, IT methods for management Computer technology Computer Basic communication processes communication Basic Electrical engineering Electrical energy apparatus, Electrical machinery, Audio-visual technology Audio-visual Technical field Technical Surface technology, coating Surface technology, Telecommunications Digital communication Digital Micro-structural and nano-technology and Micro-structural Mechanical engineering Mechanical Handling Chemical engineeringChemical technology Environmental tools Machine Engines, pumps, turbines pumps, Engines, Textile and paper machines paper and Textile machines special Other Other fields Other games Furniture, Transport Thermal processes and apparatus and processes Thermal Mechanical elementsMechanical Civil engineeringCivil Other consumer goods consumer Other 13 III 14 15 16 12 17 11 19 II 9 18 8 10 20 7 6 5 I 1 2 21 3 4 22 IV 25 23 24 26 27 28 29 V 33 32 30 31 35 34 PCT applications by fields of technology fields by of applications PCT growth rate, digitalWith a 10.1% communication became the technology field with the PCT applicationsmost published in 2018. A20. PCT applications field by technology, of 2014–2018 table concordance technology IPC WIPO’s date. publication the on and applications published on based are data reasons, confidentiality For Note: (available at: www.wipo.int/ipstats Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. 40 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 41 1 1 1 (Continued) 0.438 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.352 0.211 0.207 0.190 0.181 0.181 0.152 0.148 0.143 0.142 0.139 0.128 0.125 0.086 0.065 0.063 0.035 Republic of Korea Republic of Republic of Korea Republic of Denmark Netherlands Germany Germany Singapore Canada Canada France France France Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Japan Japan U.K. U.S. U.K. Australia Australia Spain Finland China China India Italy Italy 0 0 0 U.S. U.K. U.S. Israel Israel Spain China Japan Austria –0.022 –0.032 Canada –0.044 –0.050 Medical technology –0.057 Australia Denmark Germany –0.077 –0.079 –0.080 Computer technology Computer –0.087 –0.104 –0.114 –0.125 –0.134 Switzerland Switzerland Netherlands Netherlands SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: –0.162 –0.166 –0.176 –0.188 –0.192 –0.212 –0.215 –0.216 –0.228 –0.233 –0.270 –0.296 –0.300 Republic of Korea Republic of Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy apparatus, machinery, Electrical –0.352 –0.5 –0.5 –0.5 –0.431 –0.505 –0.531 –1 –1 –1 1 1 1 0.585 0.518 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.331 0.229 0.208 0.163 0.143 0.151 0.141 0.129 0.126 0.115 0.072 0.047 0.023 0.035 0.030 Netherlands Germany 0.024 Canada France Switzerland Japan U.S. U.K. Israel India Italy Denmark Netherlands Germany Canada France Sweden Switzerland Republic of Korea Republic of U.K. U.S. Australia Israel Italy Saudi Arabia Saudi Sweden U.S. Australia China Italy 0 0 0 U.K. China Israel China Measurement Japan Japan –0.019 Finland –0.011 Austria France Finland –0.027 Sweden –0.033 Canada Germany Digital communication Digital –0.079 Singapore –0.107 Audio-visual technology Audio-visual –0.111 Switzerland –0.154 –0.149 Netherlands –0.208 –0.213 –0.235 –0.240 –0.249 –0.271 –0.280 –0.289 Republic of Korea Republic of Republic of Korea Republic of –0.309 –0.332 –0.342 –0.5 –0.5 –0.5 –0.387 –0.389 –0.476 –0.490 –0.496 –0.510 –0.576 –0.654 –0.669 –0.762 –1 –1 –1 A21. Relative specializationA21. index for published PCT applications selected by fieldstechnology, of 2018 A high share PCT filings of from India related to pharmaceuticals, while many those of from semiconductors. to related Singapore 1 1 0.550 0.5 0.5 0.374 0.329 0.314 0.303 0.303 0.293 0.241 0.231 0.220 0.205 0.175 0.165 0.161 0.123 0.121 0.117 0.091 0.059 0.040 0.020 Republic of Korea Republic of Republic of Korea Republic of Netherlands Germany Switzerland Japan U.S. 0.007 China China 0.002 0 0 Transport Italy Italy U.K. U.S. U.K. India India Israel Spain Spain Japan Austria France France Pharmaceuticals –0.036 Canada Canada Belgium Sweden Australia Australia Denmark Germany ) was used to convert IPC symbols into 35 –0.126 Switzerland –0.222 –0.240 –0.264 –0.273 –0.285 –0.5 –0.5 –0.396 –0.425 . A positive value for a technology indicates that a country has –1 –1 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.323 0.220 0.184 0.148 0.089 0.046 0.037 0.039 0.011 Netherlands Germany Canada France Sweden Switzerland U.K. Australia Austria Israel Republic of Korea Republic of Italy Germany Canada France Sweden Switzerland U.S. U.K. Austria Israel Finland Italy 0 0 Optics U.S. China China Japan Japan Semiconductors –0.010 –0.018 Belgium –0.088 Singapore –0.140 Netherlands –0.152 –0.155 –0.159 –0.177 –0.170 –0.220 –0.262 –0.287 Republic of Korea Republic of –0.5 –0.361 –0.5 )

r –0.419 cr F F –0.459 denote applications from country C and from applications in denote a field of technology R r –0.477

–0.486 –0.511 –0.516 ∑ ∑ –0.543 c

F cr –0.603 F ∑

( and F –0.679 C –0.813 –1 –1 corresponding fields of technology. of corresponding fields Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. a relatively high share of PCT filings related to that field of technology. For confidentialityon the publication reasons, data date. are WIPO’s IPCbased technology on published concordance applications table and (available at: www.wipo.int/ipstats where F Note: This index corrects for the effects of country size and focuses on concentrationin a country in specific tend to have a lower technology or a higher propensity fields; it captures to file in whethercertain applicants technology fields. It is calculated using the following formula: RSI = Log (A21 continued) (A21 42 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 43 2018 0.8 2018 2016

0.5 2017 2014 . . 0.7 2016 2012 0.5 2015 2010 Men (%) 0.3 2008 2014 SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: 0.1 2006 2013 0.4 2004 2012

98 96 94 92 90

100

with men inventors (%) inventors men with Share of applications of Share 0.1 2011 Publication year Publication 0.8 2018 2010 Publication year Publication 2016 0.5 2009 2014

0.2 2008 2012 PERCENTAGE POINT CHANGE 0.3 2007 Women (%) 2010 . Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4125&plang=EN . Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4125&plang=EN 0.1 2006 2008 –0.2 2005 2006 –0.2 2004 2004

20 25 30 35

17 16 15 14 13 12 11

with women inventors (%) inventors women with

SHARE OF WOMEN INVENTORS Share of women inventors (%) inventors women of Share

Share of applications of Share For further details on methodology, refer to Martínez, G.L., J. Raffo 33 and No. K. Paper Saito Identifying (2016). Working Research the Gender of PCT Inventors. Economic In 2018, about 94% of PCT applications of about 94% listedIn 2018, at man least one as and inventor 32.6% all of PCT applications listed at woman least as one inventor. A23. Share of PCT applications with at least one woman as inventor and with at least one man as 2004–2018 inventor, Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Note: For further details on methodology, refer to Martínez, G.L., J. Raffo 33 No. and Paper K. Saito Working IdentifyingResearch (2016). the Gender of PCT Inventors. Economic A22. Share of women among listed inventors in PCT applications, 2004–2018 In 2018, 17.1% of all of listed inventors in PCT applications this women; were is almost 0.8 17.1% In 2018, percentage (16.4%). points higher than 2017 for Participation of women inventors in applications PCT inventors women of Participation Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019.

9.4

16.2 Austria

Africa

10.1 21.5

Japan

10.3 19.9 Germany

12.4 24.8 Sweden Europe

13.4 26.1 .

Canada 13.4 Italy 19.2

13.7 25.2 Finland

13.7 28.6

North America North Netherlands 13.7 22.8

SHARE OF PCT APPLICATIONS WITH WOMEN INVENTORS (%) Denmark 14.4 27.7

Region Oceania . Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/publications/en/details. Switzerland Origin

14.4 29.1 India

14.9 25.8 Israel

15.0 26.1 U.K. World

16.0 34.3 U.S.

16.4 26.7 Australia Asia

17.1 30.7 Belgium . Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4125

17.9 31.8 France 2018

24.4 35.2 Spain LAC 26.8 50.7 2013 .

28.9 48.7

0 China Republic of Korea of Republic 30 20 10

2008 Share of women inventors (%) inventors women of Share Share of women inventors (%) inventors women of Share as inventor for the origins, top 20 2018 Note: For further details on methodology, refer to Martínez, G.L., J. Raffo 33 No. and Paper K. Saito Working IdentifyingResearch (2016). the Gender of PCT Inventors. Economic A25. Share of women among listed inventors and share of PCT applications with at least one woman Women accounted at least listed inventors for 24% of inWomen PCT applications in China, and 2018 Note: LAC is Latin America and the Caribbean. For further details on methodology, referthe Gender to Martínez, of PCT Inventors. 33 No. G.L., Paper Research Working J. Raffo Economic and K. Saito Identifying (2016). the and Korea Republic of Spain. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. The share PCT applications of with as rose inventors in women each the of world’s geographical Africa. except for regions and 2018, between 2013 A24. Share of women among listed inventors in PCT applications geographical by region, 2008, 2013 jsp?id=4125 Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. 44 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 45 29.9 29.2 28.6 26.5 26.1 . WIPO’s IPC technology 21.4 20.9 20.5 19.3 SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: 17.4 17.2 16.7 16.4 16.3 16.0 15.7 15.6 15.6 15.4 15.2 14.8 14.8 14.6 13.7 13.6 13.4 12.8 12.4 12.4 11.2 10.2 10.2 9.8 8.2 7.8 Share of women inventors (%) women inventors of Share ) was used to convert IPC symbols into 35 corresponding fields of technology. Optics Control Handling Transport Measurement Machine tools Biotechnology Food chemistry Food Semiconductors Pharmaceuticals Civil engineering Furniture, games Furniture, . Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4125 Medical technology Telecommunications Materials, metallurgy Materials, Mechanical elements Computer technology Computer Chemical engineering Digital communication Digital Organic fine chemistry fine Organic Other consumer goods Other Other special machines Other Audio-visual technology Audio-visual Engines, pumps, turbines pumps, Engines, Basic materials chemistry materials Basic Environmental technology Environmental Textile and paper machines Textile Surface technology, coating technology, Surface IT methods for management for methods IT Analysis of biological materials of Analysis Basic communication processes communication Basic Thermal processes and apparatus Thermal Macromolecular chemistry, polymers Macromolecular chemistry, Micro-structural and nano-technology Micro-structural

Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy apparatus, machinery, Electrical Field of technology of Field Note: For further details on methodology, refer to Martínez, G.L., J. Raffo 33 No. and Paper K. Saito Working IdentifyingResearch (2016). the Gender of PCT Inventors. Economic concordance table (available at: www.wipo.int/ipstats Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. A26. Share of women among listed inventors in PCT applications field by technology, of 2018 Women inventors represented a relatively inventors highWomen in proportion inventors biotechnology, of food chemistry andpharmaceuticals.

. WIPO’s &2)&0+"-%1

5&%&-

5*28&0+"-%

0"-$&

0*(*-

.0&" &/3#+*$.'

) was used to convert IPC symbols into 35 corresponding fields &0,"-7

"/"-

)*-" . Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4125

! /2*$1 .-20.+ "-%+*-( /.+7,&01 ,"2&0*"+1 0"-1/.02 "//"0"231 &"130&,&-2 "$)*-&2..+1 *.2&$)-.+.(7 ..%$)&,*1207 &,*$.-%3$2.01 )"0,"$&32*$"+1 *4*+&-(*-&&0*-( -"-.2&$)-.+.(7 30-*230&(",&1 "//"0"231&-&0(7 &%*$"+2&$)-.+.(7 *$0.1203$230"+"-% &+&$.,,3-*$"2*.-1 "2&0*"+1,&2"++30(7 +&$20*$"+,"$)*-&07 -"+71*1.'#*.+.(*$"+ &$)"-*$"+&+&,&-21 .,/32&02&$)-.+.(7 )&,*$"+&-(*-&&0*-( *(*2"+$.,,3-*$"2*.- 0("-*$'*-&$)&,*1207 2)&0$.-13,&0(..%1 2)&01/&$*"+,"$)*-&1 )&0,"+/0.$&11&1"-% *&+%.'2&$)-.+.(7 3%*.4*13"+2&$)-.+.(7 -(*-&1/3,/1230#*-&1 "1*$,"2&0*"+1$)&,*1207 -4*0.-,&-2"+2&$)-.+.(7 "$0.,.+&$3+"0$)&,*1207 &62*+&"-%/"/&0,"$)*-&1 30'"$&2&$)-.+.(7$."2*-( ,&2).%1'.0,"-"(&,&-2 "1*$$.,,3-*$"2*.-/0.$&11&1 Note: For further details on methodology, refer to Martínez, G.L., J. Raffo and 33 K. No. Paper Saito Research Working IdentifyingEconomic (2016). the Gender of PCT Inventors. technology. of Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. IPC technology concordance table (available at: www.wipo.int/ipstats at: (available concordance table technology IPC Republic of Korea (35.3%), more than more third one working inventors of (35.3%), in Korea Republic of the field of biotechnology were women. In PCT applications filed by applicants from China (38.7%), France (37.1%) and the In PCT applications filed France (37.1%) by applicants fromChina (38.7%), Share of women amongA27. listed inventors in PCT applications origins for the top 10 field by of technology, 2018 technology, of 46 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 47 8 0 5 1 1 1 1 0 2 5 1 2 1 2 8 2 0 5 1 0 1 7 5 5 51 13 12 10 47 10 10 67 57 28 50 35 39 36 36 110 147 167 143 184 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 589 8,014 1,601 1,397 1,852 1,430 1,583 1,354 2,400 (Continued) 18,951 48,905 By country of origin 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 8 4 0 0 2 8 3 2 0 8 0 9 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 4 (international phase) (international 14 12 19 10 37 23 49 35 69 111 474 141 144 758 559 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 453 980 1,752 1,875 1,575 3,804 PCT applications filed in 2017 36,619 10,202 50,655 At receiving office SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: 7 0 4 1 0 1 0 1 1 4 0 1 1 0 7 2 1 4 6 1 1 0 0 7 6 17 15 13 31 23 42 49 40 40 48 44 60 96 96 115 619 153 180 163 245 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 7,914 1,475 2,013 1,825 1,443 2,422 1,836 1,295 19,883 53,345 By country of origin 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 4 7 2 2 0 4 2 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 (international phase) (international 11 11 14 14 47 16 24 26 42 22 60 113 124 441 570 457 920 204 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1,914 1,675 1,007 1,430 3,555 37,975 55,211 12,259 PCT applications filed in 2018 At receiving office Indonesia Bureau International Bahamas Bahrain (c) Barbados Belarus Colombia Cambodia Cameroon (d) Canada (d) Chad Chile China India Fiji Finland Azerbaijan Belize Herzegovina and Bosnia Botswana Brazil Organization Patent Eurasian European Patent Office France Belgium Darussalam Brunei Bulgaria Salvador El Estonia Costa Rica Costa Côte d'Ivoire (d) Croatia Cuba Cyprus Republic Czech Iceland Austria Democratic People's Republic of Korea Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Republic Dominican Ecuador Egypt Georgia Germany Greece Guyana Hungary Guatemala (d) Guinea Name African Intellectual Property Intellectual African Organization Property Intellectual Regional OrganizationAfrican Albania Algeria Andorra Barbuda and Antigua Argentina Armenia Australia A28. PCT applications office by and origin,2017–2018 Statistical table 6 1 0 0 5 1 3 2 8 4 2 1 3 0 4 4 6 2 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 1 5 8 15 18 19 47 31 97 27 26 52 26 30 33 88 99 141 378 270 273 201 867 820 263 295 499 486 330 1,418 1,816 1,058 3,225 4,430 (Continued) 15,751 48,205 By country of origin 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 6 8 (international phase) (international 15 18 10 24 97 21 27 26 35 45 55 43 311 179 129 376 198 207 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 902 664 1,417 1,132 1,008 47,425 PCT applications filed in 2017 15,790 At receiving office 0 1 6 0 2 0 8 6 3 3 4 2 8 4 2 6 2 0 1 1 1 4 1 3 5 14 13 18 18 15 31 21 37 28 20 49 50 45 38 116 274 274 176 143 185 278 250 766 661 620 263 392 335 930 963 4,138 1,409 1,899 3,337 17,014 49,702 By country of origin 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 5 (international phase) (international 11 14 15 16 16 27 67 28 20 22 40 39 44 63 68 917 138 186 196 201 n.a. n.a. n.a. 948 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 346 434 654 993 1,437 17,002 PCT applications filed in 2018 48,630 At receiving office Italy Jordan Kazakhstan Jamaica Japan Spain Malaysia Madagascar (c) Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Lebanon Liberia Libya (b) Liechtenstein Iraq Ireland Israel Kenya Kuwait (c) Democratic Republic People's Lao Name South Africa South Netherlands Morocco Namibia (a) Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia (c) Montenegro Malta Iran (Islamic Republic of) Serbia Slovenia Seychelles Singapore North Macedonia Norway Poland (d) Senegal Pakistan Panama Peru Nigeria (c) Nigeria New Zealand Nicaragua (d) Niger Slovakia Portugal Oman Philippines Rwanda SaintKitts and Nevis Samoa Marino San Arabia Saudi Qatar Republic of Korea Moldova of Republic Romania Russian FederationRussian (A28 continued) (A28 48 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION A SECTION A 49 0 4 1 2 0 0 1 1 3 9 0 11 14 19 21 23 95 141 156 244 1,251 3,975 4,488 5,568 56,676 243,511 By country of origin 0 2 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5 (international phase) (international 91 131 109 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 894 1,414 3,933 PCT applications filed in 2017 56,297 243,511 At receiving office SECTION A: STATISTICS ON THE INTERNATIONAL PHASE INTERNATIONAL THE ON STATISTICS SECTION A: 2 8 2 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 5 7 6 1 18 22 92 156 105 289 4,162 1,578 5,641 4,568 56,142 253,000 By country of origin 0 1 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 2 6 6 (international phase) (international 61 78 143 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1,406 1,292 3,887 PCT applications filed in 2018 55,330 253,000 At receiving office United Republic of Tanzania (a) United States of America Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu of) Republic (Bolivarian Venezuela Viet Nam Total Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Others Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Arab Syrian Thailand Togo (d) Tobago and Trinidad Tunisia Turkey Kingdom United Name Sri Lanka (c) Sweden Sudan Ukraine United Arab Emirates (c) Uganda (a) Uganda (a) The African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) is the competent receiving office. (b) The Office of Switzerland is the competent receiving office. The(c) International Bureau (IB) is the competent receiving office. (d) The African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) is the competent receiving office. n.a. indicates not applicable, as it is not an office of a PCT member State. Note: Data for are 2018 WIPO estimates. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. (A28 continued) (A28 50 SECTION B 51 51 - - - - SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: sharpest growth. The three officesexperienceto a drop in wereNPEs Brazil(−8%), and (−0.9%). the CNIPA Mexico (−1.7%) tions via the PCT System, with 154,403 NPEs; or, 24.5% of all NPEstions initiated via the 24.5% PCT world System, NPEs; with or, 154,403 wide(see figure B9). The USPTOwas followed by theEuropean Patent Office (EPO) the National Intellectual(98,431), Property Administration Republic of the People’s the JPO (62,327) of and China (80,301), the (CNIPA) Korean Intellectual Property Combined,Office thetop five offices(KIPO) (37,248). accounted for around68.7% of all NPEs initiated in 2017. Included in the list offices of top 20 are patent offices 10 high-income from econ omies middle-income and 10 countries. Aside from the CNIPA, the offices from middle-income economies receive to the most NPEs Brazil were India (26,373), and the Russian Mexico (12,664) (18,268), Federation All six geographi (10,838). cal regions were represented among the offices: top 20 10 offices were located in Asia,in 3 Europe, 1 in Africa, andLAC, North America and Oceaniahad 2 offices each (see figureB11). officesSeven of thetop 10 received than in the previous more year, NPEs 2017 in saw the and the EPO (+4%) the JPO (+4.1%) amongwhich the USPTO (+5.1%), An estimated 630,000 PCT national phase entries (NPEs) were initiated worldwide in – the latest year for which2017 NPEs data are available. This represents an increase on the previous of2.3% NPEs decreasedyear (see figure B1). in only three of the years,past 15 2003, 2009 Other and years 2016. saw increases of between 4.3% which registered comparativelya except for 2017, moderate growth rate and11%, the number of NPEs originating from several In 2017, Europeanof 2.3%. countries fell and those from China and the Republic of Korea experienced growth slower than seen in recent years. NPEs initiated non-resident by applicants represented about of total 83% NPEs in This share has tended decrease to 2017. slightly in recent years, mainly due a to strong growth in resident NPEs at the Japan Patent Office(JPO) and at the United Statesresident Patent and NPEs Trademark accounted Office (USPTO). 2017, In of total NPEs at these respectivefor and 38.8% 21.5% offices. applicants based in Europe initiatedIn 2017, the largest proportion of total NPEs and North followed closely America The those by (33.4%), in Asia (30.5%). (33.1%) combined share of those countries and territories located in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and Oceania The share was 2%. of Asia increased 12 by percentage points between (see figure B3). 2007 and 2017 the USPTO remainedthe office to receive In2017, by far the most patent applica

A quarter of PCT PCT quarterA of initiatedNPEs worldwide destined were thefor U.S. Asia and Europe accounted each a third offor NPEs initiated PCT Highlights After slight a decline 2016, in growth in PCT phase national resumes entries

Statistics on PCT national phase entries phase national PCT on Statistics Section B Section - an overall decrease in NPEs. It is most likely that was a conse the peak in 2015 quence of the spike in the number of PCT international applications filedU.S. by applicants due the to enactment in 2014 of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. Of the offices top 20 terms in of non-resident patent applications,17 received the majority of their non-resident filings via the PCT route, with the offices of Israel Brazil and South(96%), (90%) Africa having the highest (88.3%) shares, and those the lowest and shares the the (38.8%) U.K. U.S. (28.2%) (see of Germany (26.1%), B15). figure An estimated 526,000 non-resident NPEs were initiated (the worldwide in 2017 PCT By route). comparison, about patent applications 391,400 were filed directly atoffices by non-resident applicants of non-resident (theParis route). Thus, 57.3% applicationsThis is one percentage were filed via thepoint PCT routemore 2017. in and much (56.3%) higherthan than in 2016 the The 2003 long-term share (46.3%). although trended upward, has routes both via filings number of the that show data the PCT route has grown at the faster pace (see figureB13). Theincrease in the share of non-resident NPEs 57.3% rising– to from in 2016 56.3% – was due a fall to in non-resident in in 2017 combination direct with filings (–1.5%) an was increase also share much (56.3%) The 2016 in non-resident NPEs (+2.6%). Non-resident NPEs initiated applicants share U.S. by lower than (57.6%). the 2015 causing and then fell drastically (–12.9%), in 2016 increased (+12.3%) sharply in 2015 than 45% of allthan NPEs initiated 45% at the offices of Australia, Canada, Israel and Mexico. Japan-based applicants accounted for more of all thanNPEs initiated 45% at the offices of Germany and Thailand. two countries, and combined, accounted of all NPEs for initiated 49.6% in 2017, total of NPEs. Besidethe top five, thiscombined, high concentration for 69.1% among just origins, a few applicantscountries from 130 over initiated NPEs in 2017. and the Japan (+6.7%) origins,Of the top 10 the United Kingdom (U.K.) (+7.1%), reported the (+5.3%) highestU.S. annual growth inNPEs. The Republic of Korea saw quite moderate growth and compared China(+2.7%) (+3.3%) what to they hadhave theover past decade. China and the Republic of Korea were the only two countries list experienced have in to the top 10 constant annual growth in (+2.7%), and again in 2017 (+6.6%) Except in 2013 NPEs between 2008 and 2017. applicants based in China had and annual 67.2%. growth rates of between 16.1% Applicants residing in the Republic of Korea experienced have annual growth rates for seven of the years. past origins, 10 Of the top 10 theabove 7.5% four countries were Switzerland initiated have to fewer NPEs Germany in 2017 (–4.3%), (–1.4%), France (–0.9%) and Sweden (see figure (–0.4%) B6). Of NPEs the received 154,403 at the USPTO, applicants residing in Japan (21.6%) each accounted for aroundand in the (21.5%) one-fifth U.S. of thetotal (see figure U.S.-based applicants B12). accounted for the largest sharesof the of NPEs at 13 offices,top 20 and applicants residing in Japan accounted for the largest shares at the remaining 7 offices. Specifically, U.S.-based applicants accounted for more In 2017, applicants residing in the United StatesIn 2017, of America initiated (U.S.) 183,532 (seeNPEs table and those They B7). were based followed by in Japan 129,108 applicants China from (35,289) Germany and France (29,538). (57,556), The top The System PCT for accounted all of 57.3% non-resident filings in 2017 Half of PCT NPEs PCT Half of initiated worldwide originated from applicants based Japan either in theor U.S. 52 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 52 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES

When looking at the top 20 origins filing most applications abroad, applicants from Sweden (72.2%), the Netherlands (70%), Australia (69.3%) and the U.S. (68.5%) were the ones who relied most heavily on the PCT route when filing internationally. Those from India (31%), the Republic of Korea (37.3%) and Canada (37.6%) had the lowest shares of filings abroad using the PCT route (see figure B14).

Applicants residing in Belgium, Denmark and Switzerland tended to initiate a large number of NPEs for each PCT international application filed, averaging more than 4.4 NPEs per PCT application. In contrast, applicants from China and the Republic of Korea averaged just 1 and 1.7 NPEs per PCT application, respectively (see figure B8).

Huawei Huawei Technologies of China had the largest number of foreign-oriented patent Technologies families (for a definition, see annex, Glossary) using the PCT route, with 5,675 created the largest such families created between 2013 and 2015 (see figure B17). It was followed number of by Samsung Electronics of the Republic of Korea (4,371) and Mitsubishi Electric foreign-oriented Corporation of Japan (4,049). patent families using the PCT route Of the top 50 applicants in terms of foreign-oriented patent families, 22 relied mostly on the PCT System to protect their innovations abroad between 2013 and 2015 (see table B18). Within this list, two China-based companies – ZTE Corporation (99.7%) and Shenzhen China Star Optoelectronics Technology Co. (99.6%) – had the highest shares of foreign-oriented patent families using the PCT. They were followed by three U.S.-based companies – Qualcomm Incorporated (98.2%), Halliburton Energy (98.1%) and Hewlett-Packard Development Co. (97.1%). In contrast, several applicants with large numbers of foreign-oriented patent families relied very little on the PCT System, such as Samsung Display Co. (0.1%) and Ford Global Tech (1.2%).

53 Global trends in PCT national phase entries B1 Trend in PCT national phase entries, 2003–2017 55 B2 PCT national phase entries by income group, 2007 and 2017 55 B3 PCT national phase entries by region, 2007 and 2017 56

National phase entries by origin B4 PCT national phase entries by origin, 2017 56 B5 Trends in PCT national phase entries for the top five origins, 2003–2017 57 B6 PCT national phase entries for the top 20 origins, 2017 57 B7 PCT national phase entries for the top origins by region, 2015–2017 58 B8 Average number of national phase entries per PCT application for selected origins, 2017 59

National phase entries by office B9 Trends in PCT national phase entries for the top five offices, 2003–2017 59 B10 Flow of national phase entries between regions of origin and regions of destination, 2017 60 B11 PCT national phase entries for the top 20 offices, 2017 61 B12 Flow of national phase entries for the top 20 offices and the top 10 origins as a percentage of total national phase entries at respective offices, 2017 62

Patent applications by filing route B13 Trend in non-resident patent applications by filing route, 2003–2017 63 B14 Share of PCT national phase entries in total filings abroad for the top 20 origins, 2017 63 B15 Share of PCT national phase entries in total non-resident filings for the top 20 offices, 2017 64 B16 Share of PCT national phase entries in total non-resident filings for the top 10 origins and the top 20 offices, 2017 65

Top applicants in foreign-oriented patent families B17 Top 20 applicants in foreign-oriented patent families using the PCT System, 2013–2015 66 B18 Top 50 applicants in foreign-oriented patent families, 2010–2012 and 2013–2015 67

Statistical table B19 PCT national phase entries by office and origin, 2016–2017 68

54 SECTION B 55 2.3 2017 –1.3 2016 91.6% High-income 6.7% Upper middle-income 0.7% Lower middle-income 0.0% Low-income 1.0% Unknown 4.8 2015 5.2 2014 4.3 2013 2017 6.5 SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: 2012 4.9 2011 8.0 2010 Application year Application –4.3 2009 7.2 2008 92.6% High-income 1.6% Upper middle-income 0.5% Lower middle-income 0.0% Low-income 5.3% Unknown 9.0 2007 10.9 2006 ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%) 11.0 2005 11.0 2004 2007 –0.5 2003 500,000 300,000 100,000 700,000

PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PCT national phase entries phase national PCT Note: Each category includes the following number description. Data of annex, origins: see classification, group income on high-income information For (58), (19). upperlow-income middle-income lower (47), middle-income (32) and Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. B2. PCT nationalB2. phase entries income by group, 2007 and 2017 High-income economies initiated than more 90% total of national phase entries in 2017. Note: These are WIPO estimates. National phase data from patent offices are only available up to 2017. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. In 2017, the PCT number national of phase entries increased by 2.3%.In 2017, in PCT national Trend phase entries,B1. 2003–2017 Global trends in trends national phase entries PCT Global 33.4% Europe 33.1% Asia 30.5% America North 1.4% Oceania 0.4% LAC 0.2% Africa 1.0% Unknown 2017 37.1% Europe 21.1% Asia 33.9% America North 1.9% Oceania 0.5% LAC 0.2% Africa 5.3% Unknown 2007 50,000–200,000 10,000–49,999 1,000–9,999 100–999 1–99 NO DATA Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. More thanMore countries 130 initiated PCT national phase entry in 2017. B4. PCT national phase entries origin, by 2017 National phase entries by origin by phase entries National Note: Each region includes the following number of origins: Africa Asia (31), (43), Europe (45), Latin AmericaNorth America and the Caribbean (2) and Oceania (LAC) (4). (31), Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Europe and Asia each accounted around for a third all of PCT national phase entries 2017. in B3. PCT national phase entries region, by 2007 and 2017 56 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 57

5.1

4,023 Spain 2017

3.1

4,039 India 2016

–0.1 5,545 Austria 2015

2.2

5,667 Finland ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%)

2014

13.8 5,843 Denmark 11.0

6,081

2013 Belgium

4.6

7,024 Israel SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: 2012

4.6

7,127 Australia 2011

–1.3 8,870 Canada

2010 Year –0.5 Italy 10,983 Origin

–0.4

2009 12,241 Sweden 0.7 18,394

2008 Netherlands –4.3 20,573

FRANCE 2007 Switzerland

7.1 U.K. 22,268 2006 3.3 25,990 CHINA 2005

–0.9

29,538

Republic of Korea of Republic France 2.7

35,289 2004 China GERMANY –1.4 57,556

2003 Germany

6.7 129,108 Japan JAPAN

5.3 U.S.

50,000 183,532

200,000 150,000 100,000

U.S. entries phase national PCT PCT national phase entries phase national PCT Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. After three consecutive years with China growth experienced rates around 24%, in 2017, growthits slowest in PCT national phase entries since 2001. B6. PCT national phase entries for the origins, top 20 2017 Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. B5. Trends in PCT nationalB5. Trends phase entries for the top five origins,2003–2017 Since beginning the of PCT System, applicants from the U.S. initiated have the largest numbers PCT national of phase entries worldwide. 7.1 2.1 3.1 2.7 0.7 3.7 6.7 2.6 4.6 2.5 4.0 4.6 5.4 9.5 5.3 2.2 3.3 3.3 6.4 5.0 5.4 0.8 5.3 2.4 2.3 n.a. –1.4 –1.3 11.0 14.0 36.1 24.7 13.8 75.0 –6.7 72.3 –0.4 –4.3 –0.9 –0.5 96.4 33.3 –16.1 109.1 –35.1 –24.0 –59.7 –28.6 –38.9 3,300.0 2016 (%) Change from from Change

1.1 1.7 1.4 2.7 1.9 1.9 1.3 9.7 4.7 0.7 8.7 1.4 4.6 2.9 0.0 2.8 5.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.9 3.4 0.8 5.8 0.3 5.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.2 11.0 18.1 27.3 14.7 81.5 14.0 12.8 12.5 18.4 10.4 10.6 16.9 62.0 33.1 39.0 95.4 85.4 30.5 33.5 100.0 2017 (%) Regional share share Regional 0 24 21 26 20 23 40 34 140 547 130 165 379 456 438 436 689 2017 7,127 1,181 1,158 7,024 1,182 1,579 1,240 8,870 8,744 1,009 6,081 5,667 2,940 5,233 4,039 5,843 2,972 12,241 57,556 21,891 20,573 10,983 18,394 29,538 22,268 25,990 35,289 129,108 211,035 183,532 192,442 630,000 208,392 0 1 11 12 15 31 37 56 84 171 150 427 526 957 367 253 335 994 2016 1,127 1,130 5,136 6,718 1,154 1,079 6,815 5,478 3,919 1,385 2,880 8,988 5,544 8,215 2,821 21,117 25,158 11,038 12,976 29,810 21,496 12,285 18,260 20,800 34,360 58,363 174,260 197,813 120,990 615,600 209,327 183,294 1 2 18 19 28 52 32 40 611 137 191 146 441 130 776 283 569 940 2015 1,274 1,018 8,175 3,172 1,192 5,510 1,431 6,725 5,351 1,234 3,625 6,391 9,084 2,605 5,339 21,143 23,147 17,589 27,656 10,647 21,056 12,967 13,326 29,607 20,395 58,408 187,931 192,933 120,930 208,012 202,092 623,900 Total* Australia New Zealand Papua New Guinea Total* United States of America Canada Bahamas Others Total* Guatemala Panama Rica Costa Brazil Mexico Chile Argentina Colombia Peru Total* Others China Finland Others Republic of Korea Total* Japan Israel Belgium India Denmark Morocco Kenya South Africa South Singapore Total* Germany Netherlands Sweden Italy Turkey Others Origin Arabia Saudi France Kingdom United Switzerland Malaysia Thailand Unknown* (estimates) World Oceania

North America

Latin America and Caribbean the

Asia

Africa Europe

Region

Note: World totals are WIPO estimates. This table shows the top countries in each region (withapplicants a maximum countries of filed 10 more than per 20 region)PCT national whose phase Dataentries for all in 2017. origins are reported in statistical table B19. * indicates share of world total. applicable. not indicates n.a. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. six geographical regions increased in 2017. The PCT number national of phase entries initiated by applicants from each the of PCT national phase entriesB7. for the top origins region, by 2015–2017 58 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 59

1.0

–0.1 China 2017 1.7 0.0 2016

2.6

0.4

Spain Republic of Korea of Republic CHANGE FROM 2013 FROM CHANGE 2015

2.7

–0.2 India

2.9

–0.0 2014 Japan 3.2 –0.2

2013 Germany

3.2 0.1 U.S. SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: 2012

3.2

–0.1 Sweden 2011

3.4 –0.2 Italy

3.4 0.3

2010 Year Canada Origin 3.6 –0.2

2009 France

3.6 1.1 Finland 2008

3.9 0.1 Austria 2007

4.0

–0.2 Australia REPUBLIC OF KOREA

4.0

0.1 2006 Israel 4.1 –0.2 2005

JAPAN Netherlands

4.1 0.2 U.K. 2004 4.4 0.2

CHINA Denmark 2003

4.8

–0.5 Switzerland EPO

5.1 0.7 Belgium

50,000

150,000 100,000 phase entries phase

U.S. PCT national phase entries phase national PCT Average PCT national PCT Average Note: EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. B9. Trends in PCT nationalB9. Trends phase entries for the top five offices, 2003–2017 National phase entries by office PCT national phase entries destined the U.S. for increased have sharply since 2008, accounting quarter one for the of total in 2017. Note: The average is defined as the number of national phase entries initiated divided in 2017 by thethe average two preceding number of PCT years. applications filed in Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. B8. Average number of national phase entries per PCT application for selected origins, 2017 Applicants residing in Belgium and Switzerland initiated around five NPEs per PCT application, average. on

LAC Asia Africa Europe Oceania North America Destination Africa LAC Oceania Europe North America Asia Note: LAC is Latin America and the Caribbean. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Applicants residing in Asia initiated total of 39.6% national phase entries in their home region and nearly and North all America the remainder (29.6%). in Europe (29.6%) Flow of national phaseB10. entries between regions of origin and regions of destination, 2017 Origin 60 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 61

0.8

4,104 Viet Nam Viet

7.3

4,106 New Zealand New

–3.2 5,012 Malaysia

5.8

5,745 Israel ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%)

1.8

6,082 Thailand ..

6,186 Indonesia 2.3 6,216

SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: South Africa South

–1.4 6,238 Germany

3.2

7,263 Singapore –6.9 10,838 Office

–1.7

12,664

Mexico Russian Federation Russian

–8.0 18,268 Brazil 2.7

19,898 Australia

1.8 26,373 India 1.2

27,350 Canada 0.4 37,248 4.1

62,327 Japan Republic of Korea of Republic

–0.9

80,301 China

4.0 98,431 EPO

5.1

U.S.

154,403 PCT national phase entries phase national PCT Note: This graph shows the top 20 offices for which NPE data by origin are available. EPO is the European Patent Office. indicates.. data are unknown. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. B11. PCT national phase entries forB11. the offices, top 20 2017 Of the top 20 offices, those Israel, of Zealand New and the U.S. exhibited the fastest growth in PCT national phase entries. 0'$..(&(+/

2$#$+

$0'$.) +#/ $0'$.)

2(05$.) +# 2(05$.)

,.$ ,.$

.(&(+

$-1!)(",% . +"$ .

'(+ '(+

$.* +4 $.*

- + -

+#( +#( /. $) . 5() . '(+ '(+ - + $3(", %%("$ + # ' () +# ' () 1/0. )( )( 1/0. ) 4/( 4/( ) $.* +4 * ($0 +#,+$/( +#,+$/( (+& -,.$ (+& ,10' %.(" ,10' %.(" $2 $ ) +# ) $2 $ $-1!)(",%,.$ $-1!)(",%,.$ 1//( +$#$. 0(,+ +$#$. 1//( Note: This table shows the origins top 10 for which national phase entry office data are available. EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Almosttotal 39% of national phase entries initiated at the JPO originated from applicants residing in Japan. Flow of national phaseB12. entries for the offices top 20 10 originsand thetop as a percentagetotal of national phase entries at respective offices,2017 62 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 63

31.0 –7.5 India 57.3 2017 8.3 37.3 56.3 2016

2.8 37.6

Republic of Korea of Republic CHANGE FROM 2013 FROM CHANGE Canada 57.6 2015

1.6 46.5 Israel

57.0

1.7 2014 52.8 Japan PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRY SHARE (%) 1.3 54.8

55.6

2013 Austria 56.4 –2.3

55.2

SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: 2012 Germany

5.1 58.6 China 54.7 2011

60.5 –0.3 Spain 54.6 2010 Year

60.9 –2.8 Switzerland Origin 0.2

62.7 54.2

2009 Belgium 62.7 –0.1

53.0

2008 Finland 62.9 Italy –0.8 50.6 2007

2.9 65.0 U.K. 48.6 2006

0.6 67.4 France

47.2

0.2 67.9 2005 Denmark

1.1 68.5 U.S. 47.0 2004 PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES 2.6 69.3

46.3 2003 Australia

0.0 70.0 Netherlands 72.2 –0.0

600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 Sweden

PARIS ROUTE (%) Share Non-resident applications Non-resident Note: The share is defined as the number of PCT national phase entries initiated abroadabroad. divided It by includesthe total number data fromof patent the 20 originsapplications that filed filed the most applications abroad in 2017. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Applicants from filed Sweden 72.2% their of applications abroad using the PCT route. Share of PCT nationalB14. phase entries in total filings abroad for thetop20 origins,2017 Note: These data are WIPO estimates. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. In 2017, PCT national phase entries accounted for 57.3% of total non-resident filings. PCT national total of phase entries non-resident accounted 57.3% for In 2017, in non-resident Trend B13. patent applications filing by route,2003–2017 Patent applications by filing by applications Patent route

26.1 –0.6 Germany

3.4 28.2 U.K.

4.6 38.8 U.S. CHANGE FROM 2013 FROM CHANGE

0.5 58.7 China

4.3 65.7 Japan

0.5 68.1 EPO

71.4 –1.6 Australia

0.8 73.7 Singapore 76.4 –4.3

5.0 78.0 Russian Federation Russian

Office New Zealand New 2.4 79.6

79.6 –2.7

Republic of Korea of Republic Mexico

82.9 –1.9 India

0.3 83.3 Canada

84.6 –2.9 Malaysia

0.8 87.7 Thailand

87.9 –2.3 Indonesia

88.3 –1.1 South Africa South

3.4 90.0 Brazil

1.6 96.0

Israel Share (%) Share Note: The share is defined as non-resident PCT national phase entries initiated dividedfiled. It includesby the total number data fromof non-resident the 20 offices that patent received applications the most non-resident filingsPCT 2017; that System is, in data and thatfrom provided countries data that broken are downmembers by filing of route. the EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Offices middle-income of countries as such Brazil, and Indonesia South Africa received the filingsbulk their of non-resident via the PCT System. Share of PCT nationalB15. phase entries in total non-resident filings for thetop20 offices, 2017 64 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 65

2$#$+

$0'$.) +#/ $0'$.)

2(05$.) +# 2(05$.)

SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B:

,.$ ,.$ $-1!)(",%

.(&(+ . +"$ .

'(+ '(+

$.* +4 $.*

- + -

+#( +#( /. $) . 5() . '(+ '(+ - + - $3(", + # + # %%("$ ' () +# ' () 1/0. )( )( 1/0. ) 4/( 4/( ) ($0 * ($0 $.* +4 +#,+$/( +#,+$/( (+& -,.$ (+& ,10' %.(" ,10' %.(" $2 $ ) +# ) $2 $ $-1!)(",%,.$ $-1!)(",%,.$ 1//( +$#$. 0(,+ +$#$. 1//( Note: This figure includes data from the 20 offices that received the most non-residentmembers filings 2017; that of is, the in PCTdata System from and countries that provided that are data broken down by filing route. In general, nationalmember offices States receive of European relatively Patent low proportionsOffice (EPO) of national phase entries,any because EPO member applicants State. may apply via the EPO to seek protection within Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. B16. Share of PCT nationalB16. phase entries in total non-resident filings10 origins for thetop and thetop20 Applicants from Germany (48.9%) usedApplicants nearly the PCT for half route from Germany their of filings (48.9%) at the office the of U.S. offices, 2017 5,675 4,371 4,049 3,911 3,847 2,699 2,693 2,671 2,650 2,641 2,548 2,395 2,365 2,213 2,209 2,175 2,150 2,110 2,056 2,008 Foreign-oriented patent families using PCT families patent Foreign-oriented ZTE Intel NEC Sony Sharp Fujifilm Huawei Ericsson Siemens Mitsubishi LG Chem. LG Panasonic Halliburton Qualcomm BOE Tech. Denso Corp Robert Bosch Robert Hewlett-Packard

Philips Electronics Philips Samsung Electronics Samsung Applicant Note: The number of patent applications in foreign-oriented patent families as reportedfor in the the autumn most may edition be recent2018 incomplete of PATSTAT years. A patent family is a set of interrelated patent applications filed in one patentor more offices applications to protect in a family the same are invention. interlinked The by one or more of the following: priority claim, PCT nationalin-part, phase internal entry, continuation, priority, and continuation- addition or division. Foreign-oriented patent families office. home have at least one filing in an office thatis not the applicant’s Source: WIPO Statistics Database Database, and EPO PATSTAT March 2019. Top applicants in foreign-oriented patent families patent in applicants foreign-oriented Top had by far Technologies theHuawei largest foreign-oriented number families of patent using the PCT route. applicants 20 Top in foreign-oriented patent familiesB17. using the PCT System, 2013–2015 66 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 67 0.1 1.5 0.7 1.2 4.6 0.0 2.5 9.2 0.0 5.3 0.2 0.2 11.1 97.1 57.1 47.3 11.8 41.9 94.1 15.7 24.7 30.1 21.8 33.1 72.7 98.1 21.2 42.7 72.4 34.7 18.5 76.6 99.7 72.8 10.2 88.7 73.5 92.8 23.3 85.4 99.6 93.6 80.0 54.5 80.9 53.5 46.3 86.9 93.2 98.2 2013–2015 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.7 1.6 4.7 3.7 9.6 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.5 3.5 47.7 81.1 87.7 16.1 67.0 74.7 41.5 87.5 31.4 16.7 16.7 94.1 77.2 91.6 10.7 14.3 18.3 16.8 44.7 53.7 75.6 89.7 32.4 79.3 28.9 93.4 89.9 28.2 92.2 95.9 56.8 53.8 90.9 26.2 50.2 65.3 99.2 2010–2012 families using the PCT route (%) Share of foreign-oriented patent patent foreign-oriented of Share 4,411 3,148 4,811 2,106 2,510 4,512 2,014 7,265 2,015 2,768 2,216 2,375 6,371 5,730 2,427 1,867 1,867 2,275 1,949 3,795 1,840 5,587 6,501 3,037 5,297 5,042 2,402 2,048 2,460 2,253 2,840 2,053 2,580 4,438 5,232 5,288 6,033 4,034 5,354 3,282 2,263 5,339 5,383 2,298 3,698 2,890 SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: 3,660 3,300 17,672 10,255 2013–2015 917 244 832 796 444 7,125 1,152 3,176 1,180 5,181 8,137 2,149 4,104 1,813 1,313 4,731 2,791 1,467 1,028 2,570 6,753 3,785 2,597 1,662 3,703 1,488 1,356 1,886 1,480 1,340 5,573 1,882 4,492 9,489 5,483 2,555 3,432 2,380 5,354 2,889 6,085 4,643 3,545 4,302 4,080 4,544 2,266 3,080 14,328 10,292 2010–2012 Foreign-oriented patent families patent Foreign-oriented Applicant SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. CANON INC TOSHIBA KK SAMSUNG DISPLAY CO LTD ROBERT BOSCH GMBH GMBH BOSCH ROBERT HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. JIDOSHATOYOTA KABUSHIKI KAISHA SONY CORP CORP SONY SIEMENS AG FUJITSU LTD FORD GLOBAL TECH LLC SEIKO EPSON CORP MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORP CORP ELECTRIC MITSUBISHI BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO., LTD. PANASONIC IP MAN CORP HYUNDAI MOTOR CO LTD ALIBABA GROUP HOLDING LTD DENSO CORP RICOH CO LTD FUJIFILM CORP CORP FUJIFILM GM GLOBAL TECH OPERATIONS INC CORP INTEL GEN ELECTRIC HONDA MOTOR CO LTD INC ELECTRONICS LG HONGHAI PRECISION INDUSTRY CO., LTD. KOREA ELECTRONICS TELECOMM TELECOMM ELECTRONICS KOREA TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL) (PUBL) ERICSSON LM TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LTD HITACHI SHARP CORP CORPORATION MACHINES BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL LG CHEMICALLG LTD KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. N.V. ELECTRONICS PHILIPS KONINKLIJKE NEC CORP SAMSUNG ELECTRO MECH MECH ELECTRO SAMSUNG OLYMPUS CORP SK HYNIX INC HEWLETT PACKARD DEVELOPMENT CO QUALCOMM INCORPORATED INCORPORATED QUALCOMM HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERV INC KONICA CORP KYOCERA DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS INC MURATA MANUFACTURING CO CO MANUFACTURING MURATA BROTHER IND LTD BASF SE TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MFG FUJI XEROX CO LTD ZTE CORPORATION CORPORATION ZTE SHENZHEN CHINA STAR OPTOELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY OPTOELECTRONICS STAR CHINA SHENZHEN CO., LTD. SCHAEFFLER TECHNOLOGIES GMBH & CO KG Rank 1 2 4 3 5 6 7 9 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 23 24 26 25 20 21 22 27 28 29 30 33 37 31 34 32 35 36 38 40 41 42 39 43 44 45 48 47 46 49 50 B18. Top 50 applicants Top in foreign-orientedB18. patent families, and 2013–2015 2010–2012 Twenty-two the of top 50 applicants relied mainly the PCT on System to protect their innovations abroad and 2015. between 2013 Note: The number of patent applications in foreign-oriented patent families as reportedfor in the the most autumn may recent edition be 2018 incomplete years. of PATSTAT A patent family is a set of interrelated patent applications filed in onepatent or more applications offices to protect in a family the aresame interlinked invention. by oneThe or more of the following: priority claim, PCT nationalin-part, phase internal entry, continuation, priority, and addition continuation- or division. Foreign-oriented patent familieshome office. have at least one filing in an office that is not the applicant’s Source: WIPO Statistics Database Database, and EPO PATSTAT March 2019. 0 .. 0 2 9 0 .. 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 .. .. 4 0 .. 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 1 11 12 12 13 18 21 37 53 39 84 80 123 341 150 258 367 n.a. n.a. 455 1,130 5,136 6,815 5,478 5,549 8,988 (Continued) 34,360 By country of origin .. 1 .. .. 8 ...... 5 .. 6 ...... 41 12 37 33 44 170 157 167 477 106 361 657 284 234 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 535 506 1,172 2,401 1,583 27,021 19,375 81,055 19,857 PCT national phase entries in 2016 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At 0 .. 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 .. 0 0 0 .. 0 0 3 .. 6 5 3 .. 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 1 2 .. 2 0 0 11 14 18 18 24 21 28 62 82 140 185 165 379 481 n.a. n.a. 408 7,127 1,158 8,870 6,081 5,545 5,843 35,289 By country of origin .. 2 .. .. 8 ...... 3 ...... 5 ...... 81 97 25 59 574 167 143 701 229 495 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 565 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 385 400 1,692 2,362 27,350 19,898 18,268 80,301 PCT national phase entries in 2017 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At Name Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Andorra Barbuda and Antigua Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas African Intellectual Property Intellectual African Organization Eritrea Cook Islands Cook Rica Costa (d) Guinea Equatorial Congo (d) Congo Egypt Salvador El Community Plant Variety Office Variety Plant Community (d) Comoros Canada Burundi Cambodia Cameroon (d) Brunei Darussalam Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso (d) Belize Belgium (c) Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Algeria African Regional Intellectual PropertyIntellectual Regional OrganizationAfrican Croatia Cuba Côte d'Ivoire (d) Cyprus (c) Republic Czech Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Ecuador Djibouti Dominica Republic Dominican China, Macao SAR Macao China, Colombia Chile China China, Hong Kong SAR Chad (d) Chad Central African Republic (d) Republic African Central Bhutan of) State (Plurinational Bolivia Saba and Eustatius Sint Bonaire, Herzegovina and Bosnia Botswana Brazil Benin (d) Benin Belarus Statistical table PCT national phaseB19. entries office by and origin,2016–2017 68 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 69 0 0 1 .. 1 0 0 1 0 .. 0 2 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 .. 0 3 1 5 0 11 11 15 19 16 70 50 45 36 99 69 96 312 526 234 462 n.a. n.a. 335 649 6,718 1,739 1,647 3,919 5,543 (Continued) 11,038 29,810 58,363 120,990 By country of origin ...... 3 .. 3 17 17 27 56 30 174 101 185 190 253 582 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5,178 6,325 2,688 5,430 12,884 94,625 59,893 25,896 PCT national phase entries in 2016 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: 0 1 .. 0 0 .. 7 9 0 2 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 19 16 10 10 75 57 20 33 33 34 63 142 547 456 n.a. n.a. 565 339 409 7,024 1,790 1,854 5,667 4,039 57,556 10,983 29,538 129,108 By country of origin ...... 4 ...... 1 ...... 14 41 32 85 38 147 184 268 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6,186 5,745 5,012 2,523 6,238 12,664 26,373 62,327 98,431 PCT national phase entries in 2017 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At Montenegro Mongolia Malta (c) Malta Islands Marshall (d) Mauritania Mauritius Maldives Mali (d) Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Mexico of) States (Federated Micronesia (c) Monaco Malawi Malaysia Israel Iraq Ireland (c) International Bureau International Iran (Islamic Republic of) (c) Italy Jamaica Japan Kiribati Kyrgyzstan Democratic Republic People's Lao Latvia (c) Lesotho Liberia Libya (b) Liechtenstein Luxembourg Lithuania (c) Lithuania Madagascar Name Estonia Ethiopia Organization Patent Eurasian European Patent Office Union European Fiji Finland (d) Guinea Guinea-Bissau (d) Guyana Haiti See Holy Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia France (c) France Gabon (d) Gambia Georgia Germany Greece (c) Greece Grenada Guatemala Ghana (B19 continued) (B19 .. 0 9 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 .. 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 41 13 18 10 10 31 75 56 35 82 68 957 253 n.a. 994 544 606 1,127 1,462 1,385 2,550 3,829 2,880 (Continued) 25,158 21,496 12,285 18,260 By country of origin ...... 6 .. .. 6 .. 5 ...... 6 ...... 6 ...... 8 .. 17 27 73 73 63 45 64 745 123 133 288 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 336 362 539 330 883 300 7,040 1,025 5,973 6,078 2,246 2,849 3,826 11,638 37,093 PCT national phase entries in 2016 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 .. 0 .. 5 0 9 0 0 .. 2 0 0 0 74 15 23 26 23 40 46 39 43 101 n.a. 436 855 453 689 1,524 1,579 1,240 2,708 1,009 4,023 2,940 12,241 20,573 18,394 25,990 By country of origin ...... 7 .. .. 1 .. 9 ...... 3 ...... 7 ...... 17 17 16 57 72 86 34 43 171 818 451 379 227 359 n.a. 558 n.a. n.a. n.a. 383 364 4,106 7,263 1,061 2,798 6,216 1,668 2,325 6,082 37,248 10,838 PCT national phase entries in 2017 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At Syrian Arab Republic Arab Syrian Tajikistan Thailand Tunisia Tonga Tobago and Trinidad Turkey Sudan Suriname Sweden Switzerland Timor-Leste Togo (d) Sri Lanka Sri South Sudan South Spain Sint Maarten (Dutch Part) Slovakia Islands Solomon Somalia Africa South Rwanda Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Saint Kitts and Nevis Sao and Tome Principe Arabia Saudi (d) Senegal Nordic Patent Institute Patent Nordic North Macedonia Norway LuciaSaint Grenadines Vincent the Saint and Marino San Nicaragua (d) Niger Name Republic of Moldova of Republic Romania FederationRussian Oman Others Pakistan Palau Panama Republic of Korea Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands (c) New Zealand Peru Poland Portugal Papua New Guinea Patent Office of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf Philippines Qatar (B19 continued) (B19 70 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION B SECTION B 71 .. 0 0 .. 0 0 .. 0 7 0 0 10 21 143 13,706 20,800 174,260 615,600 By country of origin ...... 18 194 1,673 4,072 1,336 2,535 5,830 146,867 615,600 PCT national phase entries in 2016 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At SECTION B: STATISTICS ON PCT NATIONAL PHASE ENTRIES PHASE NATIONAL PCT ON STATISTICS SECTION B: 5 2 .. 0 0 0 .. 3 0 1 11 26 217 190 6,222 22,268 183,532 630,000 By country of origin ...... 10 185 1,744 4,104 1,319 2,873 1,555 154,403 630,000 PCT national phase entries in 2017 in entries phase national PCT At designated office designated At Uruguay Uzbekistan Zimbabwe Others Total Name Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates Kingdom United United Republicof Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Republic (Bolivarian Venezuela Viet Nam Visegrad Patent Institute Patent Visegrad Yemen Zambia Note: World totals are WIPO estimates. Offices of destination are designated and/or elected offices. (a) The African Regional Intellectual Property Organization is the competent designated or elected office. (b) The Office of Switzerland is the competent designated or elected office. The(c) European Patent Office is the competent designated or elected office. (d) The African Intellectual Property Organization is the competent designated or elected office. indicates.. data are unknown. applicable. not indicates n.a. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. (B19 continued) (B19 72 SECTION C 73 73 ------SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION compliance with PCT formality requirements, receiving payment of fees, and trans mitting copies of the application for further processing the to IB and the interna searching authoritytional (ISA). 56 ROs Bywere the endaccepting of 2018, PCT filings using the por ePCT-filing tal. This figure includes the offices of Costa Rica, Croatia and Serbia, which had declared that they were prepared accept to such filings. within a week of receipt of the application, and had processed almost of them 98% within a month (see figure C3). Nearlyof publications77% occurred during the week following the expiration of the 18-month period from the priority date, and almost all publications (99.5%) occurredwithin no more than two weeks of that period (see figure WhenC4). the international search report (ISR) is unavailable at the time of publication, an appli ability reports; and publishing PCT applications. PCT publishing reports; and ability These languages, reprethree combined, (17.9%). Chinese and Japanese (19.6%) of all applications publishedsented 83.1% Whereas (see figureC1). the combined share of these three languages has remained relatively stable and between 2013 their respective2018, contributions changed have the bulk drastically. In 2013, of applications were published and in English Chinese (53.5%) accounted for a comparatively of total publications. low share (8%) While the use of Japanese has remained stable this over period, under half of publications were published in 2018 in English. the and electronically applications PCT their of 97.1% filed 2018 in Applicants remainingon paper 2.9% (see figure The C2). share of electronic filings has con tinuously increased, since such filing mediawere introduced. A decade earlier, in 2008, less than two-thirds of PCT applications were filed electronically. the IB performedIn 2018, formalities a examination of PCT applications of 72.8% cation is republished together with the ISR once it is available. The proportion of applications republished within two months of the receipt of the ISR was 91.5%. Nearly all republications occurred (99.5%) within three months of receipt of the ISRs at the IB. These were the fastest processing times observed the over past years (see15 figure C5). A PCT application is filed with whichan RO, may be a national or regional patent office or the IB. ROs are responsible for receiving PCT applications,examining In addition its to role as a receiving office the (RO), International Bureau (IB) of WIPO is responsible for functions related the to international phase of the PCT System, includingexamining formalities; translating abstracts, titles and patent of all 45.6% PCT applicationsIn 2018, were published in English, followed by

Applicants used to fileePCT PCT of nearly 10% applications The receiving offices The IB examined all of 98% PCT applications within a month receipt of Around of 46% applicationsPCT publishedwere in English Highlights The International Bureau of the PCT System PCT the of Statistics on theperformance Section C Section - - - - lisheswrittena opinion, providing detaileda analysis of the potential patentability of the invention in light of the documents found in the search. and fifth positions, respectivelyC15).(see While the Europeanfigure Patent Office (EPO) accounted of all ISRs for 33.4% issued the top five ISAs, incombined, 2018, issued of total ISRs. 93.4% ISAs, Of the the top 10 and office the (+48.7%) of India recorded the most pronounced growth, and whereas KIPO (−7%) (+18.1%) CNIPA the officeexperienced of Israel(−5.9%) the sharpest decreases. Of all ISRs that were required be to transmitted the to IB within three months from the date of receipt of the application, were transmitted 85% within this timeframe Thethe (see JPO, Visegrad figureC18). in 2018 Patent Institute and the offices of Chile and India transmitted more than of such 99% ISRs within three months. As for those that were required be to transmitted within 9 months from the priority date, were transmitted within81.7% this timeframe The (seeoffice figureC19). of Ukraine and the Visegrad Patent Institute transmittedall ISRs within 9 months in 2018. In 2018, almost ISRs 242,000 In 2018, were issued the by 22 existing ISAs. The EPO issued ISRs80,780 and was which followed (52,038), the overtook by CNIPA the JPO become to the second ISA in terms(47,934) of ISRs issued The Korean in 2018. Intellectualranked, in fourth Property and the USPTO(21,109) Office (KIPO)(24,138) transmitted all their applications the to IB within four weeks of this date. The offices of Israel, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom had (U.K.) transmittal rates above also 99% In contrast, (see figureC13). the offices of Spain transmitted (2.2%) and verya Turkey small proportion of their applications (1.1%) theto IB within four weeks of the international filing date. The shares of PCT applications transmitted ROs by the to ISAs within four weeks varied slightly compared those to transmitted the to IB. The share was above 90% and the officefor the JPO (98.4%) 15 of transSwedenOf topthe20 ROs, (96.8%). mitted the majority of their PCT applications the to ISAs within period. a four-week Theexceptions five the Russianwere the offices India (45%), France of (45.9%), (see figure andC14). Spain (0.4%) (1.1%) Federation Turkey (8.9%), Each PCT application must undergo an international search an by ISA. Once the ISAhas performed this search,the applicant receives anISR containing lista of documentsrelevant assessing to patentability. theinvention’s The ISA also estab those representing from and Australia India (1,240), respectively, (1,482) 6.9%, of total filings from and applicants 61.6% 81.2% residing in these three countries (see figure C28). Of the ROs, top 20 the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the China of Republic People’s Property the Intellectual of National Administration the Japan(CNIPA), Patent Office(JPO) and the office of Israel received more than of their99% PCT applications electronically The share in of 2018. electronic fil In 2018, applicants In2018, filed PCT applications 24,070 about using the portal.ePCT-filing increaseThis represents on the previous year (see a 44.1% figure C27) and corre of sponds the total of 253,000 9.5% to PCT applications Applicants filed 2018. in from filed the (3,873) U.S. the most applications via the ePCT portal, followedby ings exceeded of the offices. top 20 for 80% 19 The onlyexception was the office of the Russian Federation, of which PCTapplications received 81.9% on paper (see figureC10). ROs Ontransmitted average, in 2018, their PCT applications the to IB within 2.8 weeks of the international filingAustralia,C12). (see date figure Finland and India

The issued EPO one third all of ISRs International searching authorities Australia, and Finland transmittedIndia all their PCT applications to IBthe within four weeks Nineteen the of top 20 offices received more than 80% applicationsof electronically 74 74 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C

PCT applications by publication language and filing medium C1 Distribution of PCT applications by language of publication, 2004–2018 77 C2 Distribution of PCT applications by filing medium, 2008 and 2018 77

Timeliness in processing PCT applications by the International Bureau C3 Timeliness of formalities examination, 2005–2018 78 C4 Timeliness in publishing PCT applications, 2004–2018 78 C5 Timeliness in republishing PCT applications with international search reports, 2004–2018 79

Efficiency in processing PCT applications by the International Bureau C6 Formalities examination quality index, 2007–2018 79 C7 Translation quality indicator, 2009–2018 80 C8 Distribution of translation work, 2008–2018 80 C9 Unit cost of processing a published PCT application, 2012–2018 81

Receiving offices C10 Distribution of PCT applications by filing medium, top 20 receiving offices, 2018 81 C11 Share of PCT applications with priority filings, top 20 receiving offices, 2018 82 C12 Average timeliness in transmitting PCT applications to the International Bureau, 2004–2018 82 C13 Timeliness in transmitting PCT applications to the International Bureau, top 20 receiving offices, 2018 83 C14 Timeliness in transmitting PCT applications to international searching authorities, top 20 receiving offices, 2018 83

International searching authorities C15 International search reports issued by international searching authority, 2018 84 C16 Distribution of international search reports issued by international searching authority, 2008 and 2018 84 C17 Average timeliness in transmitting international search reports to the International Bureau, measured from the date of receipt of the search copy, 2004–2018 85 C18 Timeliness in transmitting international search reports to the International Bureau, measured from date of receipt of the search copy by international searching authority, 2018 85 C19 Timeliness in transmitting international search reports to the International Bureau, measured from priority date by international searching authority, 2018 86 C20 Share of published PCT applications with and without international search reports by international searching authority, 2018 86 C21 Flow of PCT applications transmitted from selected receiving offices to the top five international searching authorities and the top five offices of PCT national phase entries, 2011–2013 87

Supplementary international searching authorities C22 Distribution of supplementary international search reports by supplementary international searching authority, 2013–2018 88

International preliminary examining authorities C23 Distribution of international preliminary reports on patentability by international preliminary examining authority, 2016–2018 88 C24 Average timeliness in transmitting international preliminary reports on patentability to the International Bureau, 2004–2018 89 C25 Timeliness in transmitting international preliminary reports on patentability to the International Bureau by international preliminary examining authority, 2018 89

PCT-Patent Prosecution Highway pilots C26 Distribution of PCT-PPH requests by international authority and office of PCT national phase entry, 2018 90

PCT applications filed via ePCT C27 Trend in PCT applications filed using ePCT, 2014–2018 91 C28 PCT applications filed using ePCT for the top 20 origins, 2018 91

76 SECTION C 77 45.6 2018 SPANISH 60.2% PDF 28.6% XML 8.3% EPS-WEB 2.9% PAPER 47.6 2017 ENGLISH SHARE (%) RUSSIAN 50.1 2016 51.8 2015 54.5 2014 PORTUGUESE 2018 53.3 2013 KOREAN SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION 52.3 2012 54.3 2011 JAPANESE Publication year Publication 58.3 2010 62.2 2009 GERMAN 32.2% PDF 20.1% XML 11.8% EPS-WEB 25.7% PAPER 10.2% PAPER+PCT EASY 65.5 2008 FRENCH 65.6 2007 65.6 2006 ENGLISH 66.6 2005 2008 66.7 CHINESE 2004 0

75 50 25

100

publications (%) publications Distribution of PCT of Distribution ARABIC EFS-WEBNote: PDF, and XML are the three fully electronic filing mediums. Since mid-2015, PCT applicationsPCT-EASY. can no longer be filed using Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Around all of 97% PCT applications filed were electronically in 2018. DistributionC2. of PCT applications filing by medium,2008 and2018 Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Around 46% PCT applications of published were in English in 2018. 2004–2018 publication, of language by applications PCT of Distribution C1. PCT applications by publication language publication by applications PCT and filing medium 76.6 85.5 2018 2018 77.9 2017 88.2 2017 79.1 2016 89.1 2016 77.9 2015 81.8 2015 74.9 2014 MORE THAN 4 WEEKS MORE THAN 4 WEEKS 80.6 2014 76.4 2013 73.9 2013 77.3 2012 SHARE OF EXAMINATIONS FINISHED WITHIN WEEKS (%) TWO 54.4 2012 SHARE OF PCT APPLICATIONS PUBLISHED WITHIN ONE WEEK (%) 75.0 2011 IN THE 4TH WEEK IN THE 4TH WEEK 53.7 2011 Publication year Publication Processing year Processing 74.2 2010 56.8 2010 65.9 2009 61.9 2009 IN THE 3RD WEEK 54.8 IN THE 3RD WEEK 2008 53.3 2008 43.1 2007 49.1 2006 43.3 2007 IN THE 2ND WEEK IN THE 2ND WEEK 8.4 2005 23.7 2006 7.4 2004 52.7 2005 0 75 50 25 100 0

75 50 25

100 category (%) category

WITHIN 1 WEEK WITHIN 1 WEEK time by Distribution Distribution by delay (%) delay by Distribution Note: PCT applications and related documents are to be published “promptly” afterthe the applicant expiration months requests of 18 from the early priority publication, date, unless or the application is withdrawn or consideredbetween the time withdrawn. limit months of 18 Timeliness from the priority is calculated date and the as the actual time elapsed publication date. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Since 2011, at least three-quartersSince 2011, PCT applications of been published have within a week of limit.the expiration the of 18-month C4. Timeliness in publishing PCT applications, 2004–2018 Note: The International Bureau (IB) performs a formality examination of PCT applicationsOnce the formality and related examination documents of a PCT promptly application after is receipt. completed, the IB sends a form to theTimeliness applicant acknowledging is calculated as the receipt time elapsed of the application. between the date of receipt of the record PCT/IB/301. form copy of the PCT application and the date of issuance of Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Timeliness in processing PCT applications Timelinessin applications PCT processing Bureau International the by The formalities examination was within completed two weeks 85.5% PCT applications of for 2018. in C3. Timeliness of formalities examination, 2005–2018 78 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C SECTION C 79 91.5 2018 2018 89.5 2017 2017 82.3 2016 2016 73.8 2015 MORE THAN 5 MONTHS THAN MORE 2015 77.4 2014 58.5 2013 2014 69.9 SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION 2012 2013 IN THE 5TH MONTH 73.7 2011 Year SHARE OF PCT APPLICATIONS REPUBLISHED WITHIN TWO MONTHS (%) 2012 Republication year Republication 76.3 2010 2011 71.1 2009 IN THE 4TH MONTH 54.3 2008 2010 45.3 2007 2009 43.1 2006 IN THE 3RD MONTH THE IN 2008 52.6 2005 2007 46.1 2004 0 75 50 25 100

95 90 85 80 75

100 category (%) category

QUALITY INDEX OF FORMALITIES EXAMINATION WITHIN 2 MONTHS Quality index (%) index Quality Distribution by time by Distribution Note: In order to measure the quality of the formalities examination by the Internationalhas Bureau developed (IB) in an a simple aggregate and comprehensive quality index, manner, calculated the IB as the average of four lead qualitykey transactions. indicators. The Three quality of these index are is based the simple on the average timeliness of: (i) the of percentage of formssent PCT/IB/301 within (notification five weeks of the IB receivingof receipt of a a PCTPCT application)application; (ii) the percentage of PCT applicationsafter the international published within filing sixdate; months(iii) theand percentagethree weeks of republications with receivesinternational the ISR; andsearch (iv) the reports percentage (ISRs) of corrections within two months to bibliographic after the IB data inoperation the published quality PCT application control error (from and rate 2008 the (from PCT to 2011) onwards). 2012 Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. The overall quality the of formalities examination has markedly, improved from an average in in 2007 2018. to 97.5% aroundof 81% C6. Formalities examination quality index, 2007–2018 Efficiency in applications PCT processing Bureau International the by Note: The International Bureau (IB) is required to publish applications even in the absencethe application of an international is republished search along report with the (ISR). ISR after In such cases, the report is received.receipt Timeliness of the ISR is at calculated the IB and the date as of republication the time elapsed between by the IB. the date of Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C5. Timeliness in republishing PCT applications with international search reports, 2004–2018 In 2018, over 90% republications over of occurredIn 2018, within two the the of ISRs. of receipt months 97.7 2018 127,459 2018 13.8% 86.2% 96.9 2017 106,911 97.4 2016 97,721 97.6 2017 2015 13.8% 86.2% 94,800 97.3 2014 93,411 95.9 2013 Year SHARE OF OUTSOURCED TRANSLATION (%) 93,459 2016 14.0% 86.0% Reports 97.3 2012 78,455 98.5 2011 62,596 2015 12.4% 87.6% 97.9 2010 55,276 95.7 2009 48,550 2014 14.0% 86.0%

93.6 2008 48,809 Reports Year 2013 12.9% 87.1% 92.3 2018 373,880 90.2 2017 342,428 2012 12.8% 87.2% 88.5 2016 309,011 88.5 2015 301,144 2011 15.5% 84.5% 90.1 2014 300,186

89.8 2013 Year 280,820 2010 13.5% 86.5% 87.1 2012 264,795 Abstracts 89.6 2011 233,471 NOT ACCEPTABLE 88.8 2010 203,460 2009 12.6% 87.4% OUTSOURCED 79.5 2009 216,282 0 80 60 40 20 100

73.9

2008 214,153 quality result (%) result quality

ACCEPTABLE Distribution of Distribution IN-HOUSE Abstracts and titles and Abstracts technological the making by function disclosure system’s patent the enhance to intended are (IB) Bureau International the by Translations Note: this meet to order In filed. were documents original the which in languages the than other languages accessible in applications PCT in information objective, the IB ensures that all titles and abstracts of PCT applications are availablepreliminary in English and examination French, and that reports all international are available search in English. and Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Since 2017, more than more 90% abstract of and report translationsSince 2017, been outsourced. have 2008–2018 work, translation of Distribution C8. Note: The translation quality indicator shows the average quality of abstracts andcombined, reports based translated on the results by external of the International suppliers and Bureau in-house (IB)'s regular translators quality types. document and combinations language all across IB performed the control control by checks. This indicator aggregates the results of such quality Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. The share acceptable of translations remained unchanged at 86.2% in 2018. 2009–2018 indicator, quality Translation C7. 80 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C SECTION C 81 18.1 622 211 411

2018

80.5

Russian Federation Russian Germany

84.1 Australia 84.4

702 260 442 Netherlands 2017 87.5

Canada

91.4 Spain

SHARE OF FULLY ELECTRONIC FILINGS (%)

93.4 India 685 239 446 2016

93.6 France 95.8 SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION

95.8 735 Bureau International 260 475 2015

96.1

Turkey Republic of Korea of Republic Receiving office

Processing year Processing 96.2 U.K.

97.4

PAPER Sweden 663 232 431 2014

97.6 EPO

98.0 Finland 98.2

722 252 470 2013 Singapore

99.2 Japan

99.2 Israel INDIRECT COSTS

99.2 China 712 248 464

2012 99.3 U.S. 0 75 50 25 100 0

600 400 200 800 filing method (%) method filing

FULLY ELECTRONIC (PDF, EPS-WEB AND XML) DIRECT COSTS by Distribution Unit cost (CHF) cost Unit Note: EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C10. DistributionC10. of PCT applications filing by medium,top20 receiving offices,2018 Receiving offices The offices China, of Israel, Japan and the U.S. received than more 99% of allof their PCT filings electronically. Note: The International Bureau (IB)’s efficiency in processing PCT applications canthe averagebe measured total cost by the unit of publishing cost of processing, a PCT application. defined Average as total cost is determinedexpenditure by total PCT System on expenditure, support and plus management a proportion activities. of The unit cost includesmanagement, the cost of all PCT activities, etc. Costs have direct including and indirect translation, components. communication, Direct costs reflectSystem expenditure and related programs. incurred by Indirectthe IB in administering costs reflect the PCT expenditure for supportingcosts are activities, weighted in order such to takeas buildings into account and only information the share that technology. is attributable Indirect to the PCTtotal System. cost The of production unit cost is calculated by the number of PCT by dividing applications the published. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C9. Unit cost of processing a published PCT application, 2012–2018 The average processing cost of was a published PCT application in 2018 622 Swiss622 francs (CHF).

70.5 Turkey 2018

73.2 China 2017

76.6

2016 78.3

Sweden Russian Federation Russian

80.7 Finland 2015

82.7 Japan 2014

83.1 Spain SHARE OF PCT APPLICATIONS WITH PRIORITY

2013 83.6 Singapore 91.6 2012

92.2 EPO International Bureau International

2011 Year 92.5 U.S. Receiving office

2010 93.6 Canada 95.6 2009

96.6

Israel Republic of Korea of Republic 2008 96.8

APPLICATIONS WITHOUT PRIORITY Netherlands

2007 97.1 India 97.3 month from the priority date. PCT applications are usually filed before the expiration12 months of from the priority

2006

th Australia

97.7 France 2005

98.3 Germany

2004 98.4 U.K. 0 75 50 25 100 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

AVERAGE TIMELINESS IN TRANSMITTING PCT APPLICATIONS APPLICATIONS WITH PRIORITY Weeks Share (%) Share date. Where this occurs, the IB should receive the application within one month of the internationalelapsed between filing thedate. international Timeliness is filingcalculated date and the as datethe timeon which the IB received the underPCT application PCT Rule are 19.4 excluded. from the RO. Applications transmitted Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Note: The copy of the PCT application – known as the record copy – sent by the receiving office (RO)before must thereach expiration the International of the 13 Bureau (IB) After three consecutive years decline, of receiving offices’ average timeliness in transmitting PCT applications to the International Bureau increased slightly to Average timelinessC12. in transmitting PCT applications the to International Bureau, 2004–2018 Note: EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. 2.8 weeks in 2018. More thanMore PCT applications of 98% filed at the offices Germany of and the U.K. based were priorityon filings. Share of PCT applications withC11. priority filings,top20 receiving offices,2018 82 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C SECTION C 83 0.4

1.1 Spain Spain 1.1

2.2

Turkey Turkey 8.9 43.6

45.0

India

60.7

France Russian Federation Russian Russian Federation Russian 45.9

78.5

France Canada 50.1

89.3 EPO Netherlands

57.6

90.4

Netherlands

63.8

90.5 U.S.

Germany International Bureau International

67.7

91.3 China

SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION Germany

70.3 SHARE OF SEARCH COPIES TRANSMITTED WITHIN 4 WEEKS (%) Israel 92.4 SHARE OF PCT APPLICATIONS TRANSMITTED WITHIN 4 (%) WEEKS 84.2 96.1

Receiving office

Receiving office Singapore International Bureau International Singapore

84.3

97.5

China

Australia

84.8 U.K. 99.0 U.K. 84.8 99.3 MORE THAN 8 WEEKS 85.7

99.5

MORE THAN 8 WEEKS

Republic of Korea of Republic Canada Republic of Korea of Republic Sweden

86.1 99.8 EPO

Japan

87.1 U.S. 99.9 Israel 88.3

100.0 5 – 8 WEEKS

5 TO 8 WEEKS

Finland Australia

96.8

100.0

Finland Sweden

98.4

100.0 India Japan 0 0

75 50 25 75 50 25

100 100

time category (%) category time time category (%) category time

WITHIN 4 WEEKS WITHIN 4 WEEKS Distribution by Distribution Distribution by Distribution Note: Timeliness is calculated as the time elapsed between the international filing(ISA) date received and the date theon which PCT application the international – known as thesearching search copy authority – from the receiving office.unavailability Dates of search of data. fee payments Applications are not used, transmitted due to the under the terms of PCT Rule are 19.4 excluded. EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C14. TimelinessC14. in transmitting PCT applications international to searching authorities, receiving top 20 offices, 2018 The offices Japan of and transmitted Sweden than more 90% all of PCT applications to international searching authorities within four weeks. Note: The copy of the PCT application – known as the record copy – sent by the RO must reach the IB beforemonth the expiration from the priority of the thirteenth date. PCT applications are usually filed before the expirationthe IB12 shouldmonths of receivefrom the priority the application date. Where within this one monthoccurs, of the international filing date. internationalTimeliness is calculated filing date and theas thedate time on whichelapsed the IB receivedbetween thethe PCT application from theexcluded. RO. Applications EPO is the European transmitted Patent Office. under PCT Rule19.4 are Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C13. TimelinessC13. in transmitting PCT applications the to International Bureau, receiving top 20 offices, 2018 Australia, Finland and India transmitted all their of PCT applications to the International Bureau within four weeks. 35

–10.3 Ukraine 35

–18.6 Egypt 111

33.4% EPO 21.5% China 19.8% Japan 10.0% Korea Republic of 8.7% U.S. 6.6% Others 1133.3 Turkey 1.6 128 ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%)

2.8 181 Austria

229 –17.3 Institute Patent Visegrad

304 40.1

Chile Nordic Patent Institute Patent Nordic 487

–7.8

2018 Brazil

7.7 501 Finland

657 24.9 Singapore 900

–17.6 Spain

–6.8 1,013 Sweden

–5.9 1,319 Israel International searching authority International

48.7 1,588 India 41.2% EPO 3.2% China 14.2% Japan 7.0% Korea Republic of 28.1% U.S. 6.3% Others

7.5

2,149 Canada

–1.2 2,395 Australia 1.6 3,912

0.0

U.S.

21,109 Russian Federation Russian –7.0 24,138 2008 4.3

47,934 Japan Republic of Korea of Republic

18.1

52,038 China

1.4

80,780 EPO Search reports Search Note: EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Note: EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. The European Office Patent established a third all of international search reports in 2018. DistributionC16. of international search reports issued international by searching authority, 2008 and 2018 International searchingInternational authorities The European Office Patent issued nearly international 81,000 search reports. InternationalC15. search reports issued international by searching authority, 2018 84 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C SECTION C 85

56.1 Finland

2018 67.4 U.S. 71.1 2017

72.3 Austria

2016 Russian Federation Russian

76.2 Sweden 76.4 2015

79.0 EPO Republic of Korea of Republic 2014

85.0 Total MORE THAN 9 MONTHS THAN MORE

91.9 Brazil 2013

92.9 Egypt SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION 2012

93.1 Turkey 93.7

2011 Year Australia 8 TO 9 MONTHS 8 TO

94.0 Israel

2010 95.3 Canada International searching authority International

SHARE OF INTERNATIONAL SEARCH REPORTS TRANSMITTED WITHIN 3 MONTHS (%)

96.0 Ukraine 2009

98.0 Spain 6 TO 7 MONTHS 6 TO

98.3 2008 Singapore 98.5 2007

98.7

China 99.1 Institute Patent Nordic 2006 4 TO 5 MONTHS 4 TO

99.1 India 2005

99.9

Japan Visegrad Patent Institute Patent Visegrad 100.0 Chile 2004 0 75 50 25 100

6 5 4 3 time category (%) category time

WITHIN 3 MONTHS AVERAGE TIMELINESS IN TRANSMITTING INTERNATIONAL SEARCH REPORTS (FROM RECEIPT OF SEARCH COPY) by Distribution Number of months of Number Note: The international searching authority (ISA) must establish the internationalthe application search – known report as the search (ISR) within copy – or nine three months months from of receiving the priority a copy of date if no (or, prioritywhichever is claimed, expires from later. Timeliness the international is calculated filing date), as the time between the date when the ISAwhen receives it transmits a copy of the the PCT ISR application to the International and the date Bureau if applicable, (or, the date of receipt ofshows the declaration timeliness in under establishing Article This the 17(2)(a)). figure ISR where the applicable time limit for establishingthe search the copy. When ISR under thedate of Rule receipt 42 is three of the months search from copy receipt is unknown of and the ISA is the same officesearch as the receiving copy to have been office, received we consider on the international the filing date and calculate the timeliness accordingly. EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C18. TimelinessC18. in transmitting international search reportsthe to International Bureau, measured from date of receipt of the search copy international by searching authority, 2018 At all international searching authorities, the bulk those of international search reports that should be transmitted to the International Bureau within three from months the date the of search receipt of this copy met deadline. Note: The international searching authority (ISA) must establish the internationalthe application search – known report as the search (ISR) within copy – or nine three months months from of receiving the priority a copy of date if no (or, prioritywhichever is claimed, expires from later. Timeliness the international is calculated filing date), as the time between the date the ISA receivesit transmits a copy of the the PCT ISR application to the International and the date Bureau when if applicable, (or, the date of receipt of the declarationtimeliness in under establishing Article This the 17(2)(a)). figure ISR where shows the applicable time limit for establishingthe search the ISR copy. under Rule 42 is three months after the date of receipt of Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C17. Average timeliness in transmittingC17. international search reports the to International Bureau, measured from the date of receipt of the search 2004–2018 copy, Since 2008, there has in timeliness been a near improvement continuous in transmitting international search reports to the International Bureau.

23.3 19.5 Turkey

42.2

81.0

Egypt

Sweden

68.2 Institute Patent Nordic

86.4

Austria Austria 69.0 93.6

74.7

China 93.8 U.S.

Republic of Korea of Republic Russian Federation Russian

MORE THAN 12 MONTHS THAN MORE 78.8 EPO

93.8 Spain

80.0 Turkey 95.2 80.3

95.5

Australia

81.7 Federation Russian Total

96.3 EPO

85.7 Egypt

97.1 India Visegrad Patent Institute Patent Visegrad IN THE 12TH MONTH 12TH THE IN 87.0 97.3

88.0

Singapore

Finland

Republic of Korea of Republic 98.2

91.8 Canada Canada

98.2

Finland 94.1 U.S. International searching authority International International searching authority International 98.4

SHARE OF INTERNATIONAL SEARCH REPORTS TRANSMITTED WITHIN 9 MONTHS (%)

94.9 Israel A2 (WITHOUT INTERNATIONAL SEARCH REPORT) SHARE OF INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATIONS WITH INTERNATIONAL SEARCH REPORT (%)

98.8 IN THE 11TH MONTH 11TH THE IN Brazil

95.0

Brazil Nordic Patent Institute Patent Nordic 98.9

96.0

Spain Australia

99.1

Israel

97.4 Chile

99.6

Chile

98.4 Singapore

99.7

99.4

Japan Sweden IN THE 10TH MONTH 10TH THE IN

99.8

99.5 India China

99.9

100.0 Japan Ukraine

100.0 100.0 Ukraine 0 0

75 50 25 75 50 25

100 100

publication type (%) type publication time category (%) category time

A1 (WITH INTERNATIONAL SEARCH REPORT) WITHIN 9 MONTHS Distribution by Distribution Distribution by Distribution Visegrad Patent Institute Patent Visegrad Note: A further measure of the performance of an ISA is the proportion of ISRs that areapplication, transmitted known publication. to the as IB A1 in time for publication EPO is the European with the Patent PCT Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. For 16 international 16 searchingFor authorities, the share PCT applications of published by the International Bureau with an international search report they issued exceeded have 95%. ShareC20. of published PCT applications with and without international search reports international by searching authority, 2018 Note: The international searching authority (ISA) must establish the internationalthe application search – known report as the search (ISR) within copy – or nine three months months from of receiving the priority a copy of date if no (or, prioritywhichever is claimed, expires from later. Timeliness the international is calculated filing date), as the time elapsed between the prioritythe International date and the Bureau date on if which applicable, (or, the ISA transmits the date of receipt the ISR to of the declaration underfrom Article the priority for ISRs 17(2)(a)) where date. the This deadline figure is nineshows monthstimeliness in establishing the ISR wherenine the monthsapplicable from the time priority limit for establishing date (or international the ISR under filing dateRule if 42 no is priority is claimed).the ISA is not When the same the date office of receipt as the of thereceiving search copyoffice, is unknown we calculateand the timeliness from the priority date. EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. For 20 the of 22 internationalFor searching authorities, the majority those of international search reports that should be transmitted to the International Bureau within nine months theof priority date this met deadline. TimelinessC19. in transmitting international search reports the to International Bureau, measured from 2018 searching authority, international priority by date 86 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C SECTION C 87

U.S. EPO China Japan Other ofﬁces Republic of Korea Office of PCT national phase entries national OfficePCT of

SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION Japan Republic of Korea U.S. China Other ISAs EPO International searching authorityInternational

France Canada Other ROs International Bureau Republic of Korea U.K. EPO China Japan U.S. Note: National phase entry (NPE) data may be incomplete. This figure shows the flow of PCT (ROs),applications international between searching selected authorities receiving (ISAs)offices and offices of NPEs. Data for applications.the offices of NPEs Each are based RO may specify on fractional one or more counts ISAs of asPCT competent for PCT applications filed with it. EPO is the European Patent Office. Source: WIPO Statistics Database Database, and EPO PATSTAT March 2019. Receiving office C21. Flow of PCT applicationsC21. transmitted from selected receiving officesto thetop five international searching authorities and the top five offices of PCT national phase entries,2011–2013 Of all PCTapplications filed at the Office Japan a large Patent and 2013, between 2011 proportion the entered national phase in the U.S. based an on international search report produced by the Office. Japan Patent 1 3 3 1 1 54 63 9.5 4.7 n.a. 8.0 2018 –7.7 12.5 –2.0 75.0 –4.5 26.3 –6.4 34.0 46.4 –3.5 –14.9 –19.2 –13.2 –16.7 –29.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 –66.7 2017(%) Change from Change 1 2 6 40 49 2017 7.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 0.0 0.5 4.6 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.1 (%) 16.7 60.4 100.0 2018 share 1 3 44 48 2016 4 7 2 6 3 41 16 67 50 40 36 69 66 Year 111 172 128 135 592 399 993 2018 7,722 2,130 2 22 40 64 12,789 2015 2 4 1 3 8 9 61 46 51 47 76 28 32 50 98 109 2014 316 213 134 162 106 548 2017 Year 1,061 1,945 8,365 13,257 3 2 32 67 30 2013 5 5 47 31 71 81 25 26 60 60 231 209 206 382 599 2016 2,019 9,075 1,227 14,359 Israel Ukraine Turkey Japan Institute Patent Nordic Singapore Sweden United States of America China India Egypt European Patent Office Republic of Korea FederationRussian Spain Total Visegrad Patent Institute Patent Visegrad Finland European Patent Office Russian FederationRussian Chile Canada Sweden Turkey Ukraine Total Singapore Austria International preliminary examining authority examining preliminary International Supplementary international searching authority searching Supplementary international Australia Austria Brazil International preliminary examining authorities authorities examining preliminary International The European Office Patent issued 60% all of international preliminary reports on patentability in 2018. Note: The data for may be 2018 incomplete. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. Note: The data for may be 2018 incomplete. applicable. not indicates n.a. Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C23. Distribution internationalC23. of preliminary reports patentability on international preliminary by examining authority, 2016–2018 Supplementary international searching authorities about 60 supplementaryIn international 2018, search reports issued. were DistributionC22. of supplementary international search reports supplementary by international searching authority, 2013–2018 88 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C SECTION C 89

17.1 India 2018 45.2 2017

49.7

China Republic of Korea of Republic

59.4 Israel 2016

66.7 Austria 2015 75.0 76.0

2014

Nordic Patent Institute Patent Nordic 76.3 U.S. Russian Federation Russian

77.9 2013 Canada

SHARE OF IPRPS TRANSMITTED WITHIN 28 MONTHS (%) 80.0 Turkey SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION 2012 83.3 MORE THAN 32 MONTHS THAN MORE

84.2

2011 Year Australia

85.7

Visegrad Patent Institute Patent Visegrad Ukraine 2010

86.3 Total 87.9

2009 Finland International preliminary examining authority International

31 TO 32 MONTHS 31 TO

88.3 Sweden 2008

88.6 EPO

91.0 Brazil 2007

94.6 Japan

2006 95.0 Spain 29 TO 30 MONTHS 29 TO 99.1

2005

Singapore 100.0 Chile

2004 100.0 Egypt 0 75 50 25 100

32 31 30 29 28 27 time category (%) category time

WITHIN 28 MONTHS WITHIN AVERAGE TIMELINESS IN TRANSMITTING INTERNATIONAL PRELIMINARY REPORTS ON PATENTABILITY Distribution by Distribution Number of months of Number Note: This figure presents the same timeliness information foras 2018 that presented in thepreliminary figureC24, but breaks examining it down by international authority (IPEA) and time category. Timeliness is calculateddate when the International as the time elapsed Bureau between received the priority the international date and the preliminary reportPatent Office. on patentability (IPRP) from the IPEA. EPO is the European Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C25. TimelinessC25. in transmitting international preliminary reports on patentability the to International Bureau international preliminary 2018 by authority, examining The offices Chile of and Egypt transmitted all international preliminary reports on patentability to the International Bureau within 28 months. Note: Timeliness is calculated as the time elapsed between the priority authority (IPEA). preliminary examining international date the from and preliminary (IPRP) report patentability international the on date on which the International Bureau received the Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C24. Average timelinessC24. in transmitting international preliminary reports on patentability the to International Bureau, 2004–2018 Despite a slight increase in timetaken the timelinessin 2018, in transmitting international preliminary reports patentability on to the International Bureau has markedly improved since 2011. Total 28 25 67 38 43 84 749 153 231 730 239 343 696

1,651 2,267 7,344 Others 9 0 5 4 0 3 8 9 5 2 4 5 5

10 30 99 Sweden 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 5 1

24 35 Russian Federation Russian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 6 3 3

12 20 48 Israel 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 2 5

13 12 28 39

108 Canada 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 6 4

10 10

154 195 China 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 16 24 33 35 85 100 297

Office of earlier examination earlier of Office Republic of Korea of Republic 1 0 5 0 2 0 5 0 14

37 28 55 48 45

104 344 U.S. 6 0 0 17 12 10

47 16 97 73 22 38 66

101 103 608 European Patent Office Patent European 0 0 0 0 0 13 76 20 63 101 578 160 235 266 660

2,172 Japan 3 2 7 11 10 10 27 84 112 719 155 158 282 383 1,475 3,438 Total Others Eurasian Patent Organization Patent Eurasian New Zealand United Kingdom United Colombia Malaysia Israel Australia Mexico Russian FederationRussian European Patent Office Canada Republic of Korea Office of later examination later of Office China Japan PCT-Patent Prosecution Highway pilots Prosecution PCT-Patent The Prosecution office Highway China of (PPH) received PCT-Patent a total 1,651 of requests, whichof most originated from Japan. C26. Distribution requests of PCT-PPH international by authority and office of PCT national phase entry, 2018 Note: Data for several offices of later examination, such as Germany, Indonesia and the United States PatentTrademark and Office (USPTO) are missing. Source: WIPO, based on datafrom the Japan Patent Office, March 2019. 90 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

SECTION C SECTION C 91

141 53.3 France 172

177.4 Norway 2018 172

164.6 China 205 17.1

ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%) Netherlands

211 38.8 Germany

249 23.3 U.K. 2017 253

–11.8 New Zealand New

271

33.5 SECTION C: STATISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PCT SYSTEM PCT THE OF PERFORMANCE THE ON STATISTICS C: SECTION Africa South

305 25.5 Finland

2016 362 Year 85.6 Israel Origin

8.1 401 Brazil

660 25.2 Switzerland

8.0 705 Singapore 2015

733 25.3 Turkey

4.1 884

Sweden 31.2 Italy 1,187

31.9 1,233 2014 Canada

23.3 1,240 India

10.6 1,482

Australia 3,873 U.S. 212.1 5,000 25,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000

PCT APPLICATIONS VIA E-PCT PCT applications via e-PCT via applications PCT PCT applications via e-PCT via applications PCT Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C28. PCTC28. applications filed using ePCT for thetop20 origins,2018 The PCT number applications of filed by applicants via residing ePCT in 2018 in the U.S. has than more tripled year. in one Source: WIPO Statistics Database, March 2019. C27. Trend in PCT applications Trend filed2014–2018 usingC27. ePCT, Applicants filed 24,070 PCT applications representing using ePCT an in 2018, increase of 2017. on 44.1% PCT applications filed applications PCT via ePCT 92 A brief presentation of the Patent Cooperation Treaty

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is an interna- offices, as well as the payment of associated legal tional treaty administered by the World Intellectual fees and translation costs. By deferring national and Property Organization (WIPO). Since entering into regional procedures, applicants gain time to make deci- force in 1978, the PCT has served as an alternative sions on the potential commercialization of their inven- to the Paris Convention route for pursuing patent tion and the markets in which to seek patent protection. rights in different countries. The PCT System makes it possible to seek patent protection for an invention The reports produced by the international authorities that simultaneously in multiple countries by filing a single applicants receive during the international phase – about “international” patent application instead of filing sev- relevant prior art and the potential patentability of their eral separate national or regional patent applications. inventions – help them make well-informed decisions. When it was first established, the PCT System comprised 18 members. By the end of 2018, it comprised In addition, the PCT System is intended to reduce 152 Contracting States, as shown on the map below. unnecessary duplication among patent offices and to A table listing all PCT Contracting States is provided support work sharing between these offices. at the end of this review. Under the PCT System, an applicant must file a patent application with a receiving office (RO) and choose an Advantages of the Patent international searching authority (ISA) to provide an Cooperation Treaty international search report (ISR) and a written opinion on the potential patentability of the invention. The Applicants and patent offices of Contracting States International Bureau (IB) of WIPO then publishes the benefit from uniform formality requirements, inter- application in PATENTSCOPE, its online database. national search, supplementary international search Following receipt of the ISR and written opinion, the and preliminary examination reports, and centralized applicant can choose to request a supplementary inter- international publication. national search (SIS) by a supplementary international searching authority (SISA), have an international prelim- Compared with the Paris Convention route, applicants inary examination (IPE) of this application undertaken can delay examination procedures at national patent by an international preliminary examining authority

Contracting States in 2018

Source: WIPO, March 2019.

93 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

(IPEA) or take no further action. The applicant generally the invention. If the written opinion is unfavorable, the has at least 30 months from the earliest filing (priority) applicant may choose to amend the application to date to decide whether to enter the national phase in improve the probability of obtaining a patent, to with- the countries or regions in which protection is sought. draw the application before international publication and before incurring additional costs, or to do nothing. International phase Supplementary international search The international phase usually continues for a period of 18 months and mainly involves the filing and formal Since January 1, 2009, the SIS service has offered examination of the application, international search, applicants the option of requesting additional searches international publication, optional SIS and optional IPE. from ISAs other than the one that carried out the initial Published applications are accessible free of charge search. This service aims to give applicants the option through PATENTSCOPE, WIPO’s online database. of obtaining a more complete overview of the prior art in the international phase by allowing them to have Filing applications an additional search performed in the ISA’s specialty language. Applicants can request an SIS report by an Typically, applicants seeking to protect an invention in SISA up to 22 months from the filing (priority) date. more than one country first file a national or regional patent application with their national or regional patent International preliminary examination office. Within 12 months from the filing date of that first application (a time limit set by the Paris Convention), After receiving the ISA’s written opinion, applicants applicants then file an international application under can request an optional IPE – a second evaluation of the PCT with a RO – the respective national or regional the invention’s patentability – to be carried out by an patent office, or the IB – thereby beginning the inter- IPEA, usually on an amended version of the applica- national phase. Only a national or resident of a PCT tion (all ISAs are also IPEAs). The resultant interna- Contracting State can file a PCT application. Where tional preliminary report on patentability (IPRP) further several applicants are named in the PCT application, assists the applicant in determining whether to enter only one needs to comply with this requirement. the national phase and contains useful information for elected offices in the national phase. Because the application has legal effect in all Contracting States, applicants can effectively post- National phase pone the requirement to pay certain substantial fees and costs, such as the cost of translating the applica- Applicants have at least 18 months from the filing date tion into national languages. of their applications before their applications need to enter the national phase at individual patent offices. The RO transmits a copy of the application to the IB, This delay affords additional time – compared to that which is responsible for: allowed under the Paris Convention – to evaluate the chances of obtaining a patent and to plan how to use • receiving and storing all application documents; the invention commercially in the countries in which • performing a second formalities examination; protection is sought. In the national phase, certain PCT • translating the title and abstract of the application protections continue to apply. During this phase, the and certain associated documents into English and/ particular patent office processes the application in or French, where necessary; accordance with its national patent laws and decides • publishing the application and related documents in whether to grant patent protection. The time required PATENTSCOPE; and for processing varies across patent offices. • communicating documents to offices and third parties. Patent Prosecution Highway International search The PCT-Patent Prosecution Highway (PCT-PPH) Applications are subject to an international search by pilots comprise bilateral agreements between patent an ISA, which identifies the prior art relevant to the offices to enable applicants to request an accelerated patentability of the invention, establishes an ISR and processing of their national phase applications. Under provides a written opinion on the invention’s potential these agreements, an applicant receiving a written patentability. That opinion can assist the applicant in opinion or an IPRP indicating that at least one claim deciding whether to continue to seek protection for in the PCT application has novelty, an inventive step

94 ANNEXES

Overview of the PCT System

Transmittal of international search report + written opinion

PCT ﬁling International publication Communication by the International Bureau to national/regional oces months 12 16 18 22 28 30

First ling PCT international phase PCT national phase

Application ﬁled Article 19 amendments Application enters national phase with national/regional (optional) before selected patent of ces patent ofﬁce (priority date) Supplementary international Supplementary National or regional search and examination search request (optional) international search report Country C (if requested) Grant or refusal International preliminary International Country B by national or examination demand (optional) preliminary report regional of ces on patentability Country A (Chapter II; if requested)

Bene ts - One PCT application with legal effect in all PCT Contracting States - Harmonized formal requirements - Receive patentability information to support strategic decision-making - Postpone signi cant costs for national processing by 18 months

Source: WIPO, April 2019.

and industrial applicability, may request that the other participating patent offices take up the processing of that application out of turn. The applicant may request the PCT-PPH procedure when entering the national phase of the PCT in a participating designated state. The advantage for PCT applicants is that patent applications are processed faster and more efficiently by designated (or elected) offices. Participating offices also benefit from a reduced examination workload and additional knowledge sharing.

The Global Patent Prosecution Highway (GPPH) was launched in 2014. The GPPH pilot is a single, multilateral agreement between a group of offices. It enables applicants to make a request for accelerated processing at any participating office, based on work products (including PCT reports) from any of the other participating offices, using a single set of qualifying requirements.

For more information on the PCT, please visit www.wipo.int/pct/.

95 Data description

Data presented in this review were drawn from the in this review. National phase entry data by origin may WIPO Statistics Database. Due to a delay in transmit- therefore differ slightly from other sources, such as ting PCT applications to WIPO, the figures for 2018 are WIPO’s IP Statistics Data Center. estimates. For top filing countries, estimates are made using several statistical and econometric models. For Income groups correspond to those used by the World other countries, the estimates adjust actual received Bank1 and groupings by region are based on the United applications according to each country’s share of the Nations (UN) definition of regions.2 estimated total PCT filings. The figures in this review are subject to change.3 In 2015, the number of published PCT applications decreased by nearly 5%. This was partly due to the fact that in the previous year – as happens every five to six years – the number of weeks of publication was 53 instead of 52, resulting in an increase in the number of publications recorded for 2014. This may affect the annual growth rates presented in indicators based on published PCT applications.

For confidentiality reasons, the lists of top applicants and PCT applications by fields of technology are based on the publication date.

For the national phase of the PCT System, statistics are based on data supplied to WIPO by national and regional patent offices – data which WIPO often receives six months or more after the end of the year in question. Therefore, the latest year for which data are available is 2017. Data may be missing for some offices and may be incomplete for some origins. Data by origin are not available for countries whose patent offices have not provided their annual patent statistics. Data are available for the majority of larger offices. With the 2017 data supplied to WIPO corresponding to 99.5% of the world total, only a small proportion of 1 Available at: https://datahelpdesk.worldbank. org/knowledgebase/articles/906519 the total is estimated. Missing data are estimated using 2 Available at: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/ such methods as linear extrapolation and averaging methodology/m49/. Although the geographical adjacent data points. The equivalent patent applica- terms used by WIPO may differ slightly from those defined by the UN, the composition of tion concept for patent statistics by origin is not used regions and sub regions remains identical. 3 Regular updates are available at: www.wipo.int/ipstats

96 Acronyms

ARIPO African Regional Intellectual OAPI African Intellectual Property Property Organization Organization CNIPA National Intellectual Property PCT Patent Cooperation Treaty Administration of the People’s PCT-PPH Patent Cooperation Treaty-Patent Republic of China Prosecution Highway EPO European Patent Office PDF Portable document format GPPH Global Patent Prosecution Highway PRO Public research organization IB International Bureau of WIPO RO Receiving office IP Intellectual property SIS Supplementary international search IPC International Patent Classification SISA Authority specified for supplementary IPE International preliminary examination search (supplementary international IPEA International preliminary examining searching authority) authority SISR Supplementary international search IPRP International preliminary report on report patentability U.K. United Kingdom ISA International searching authority U.S. United States of America ISR International search report USPTO United States Patent and Trademark JPO Japan Patent Office Office KIPO Korean Intellectual Property Office WIPO World Intellectual Property LAC Latin America and the Caribbean Organization NPE National phase entry XML Extensible markup language

97 Glossary

Applicant: An individual or legal entity that files a pat- Elected office: The national or regional office of, ent application. There may be more than one applicant or acting for, a state elected by the applicant under in an application. For PCT statistics, the place of resi- Chapter II of the PCT where the applicant intends to use dence of the first named applicant is used to determine the results of the international preliminary examination. the origin of a PCT application. Filing abroad: For statistical purposes, an application Application: The procedure for requesting IP rights at filed by a resident of a given state or jurisdiction with a patent office which then examines the application and an IP office of another state or jurisdiction. For exam- decides whether to grant protection. Also refers to a set ple, an application filed by an applicant domiciled in of documents submitted to an office by the applicant. France with the Japan Patent Office (JPO) is considered an application abroad from the perspective of Application abroad: See “Filing abroad”. France. This differs from a “non-resident application”, which describes an application filed by a resident of Authority specified for supplementary international a foreign state or jurisdiction from the perspective of search (SISA): An international searching author- the office receiving the application; so, the example ity (ISA) that provides a supplementary international above would be a non-resident application from the search service – also known as a supplementary inter- JPO’s point of view. national searching authority (SISA). Foreign-oriented patent families: A patent family is Chapter I of the PCT: The provisions in the PCT that a set of interrelated patent applications filed in one or regulate the filing of PCT applications, the international more offices to protect the same invention. The patent searches and written opinions of ISAs, and the interna- applications in a family are interlinked by one or more tional publication of PCT applications – and that pro- of the following: priority claim, PCT national phase vide for the communication of PCT applications and entry, continuation, continuation-in-part, internal pri- related documents to designated offices. ority, and addition or division. Foreign-oriented patent families have at least one filing in an office that is not Chapter II of the PCT: The provisions in the PCT that the applicant’s home office. regulate the optional international preliminary examination (IPE) procedure. Global Patent Prosecution Highway (GPPH): The GPPH pilot is a single multilateral agreement between a Designated office: A national or regional office of, group of offices. It allows applicants to make a request or acting for, a state designated in a PCT application for accelerated processing at any participating office, under Chapter I of the PCT. based on work products from any of the other participating offices (including PCT reports), using a single Designated state: A Contracting State in which pro- set of qualifying requirements. tection for the invention is sought, as specified in the PCT application. International application: See “PCT application”.

98 ANNEXES

International authority: A national or regional patent International search report (ISR): A report estab- office or intergovernmental organization that fulfills lished by an ISA containing citations of documents specific tasks, as prescribed by the PCT. (prior art) considered relevant for determining, in particular, the novelty and inventive step of the invention International Bureau (IB) of WIPO: In the context of as claimed. The ISR also includes the classification of the PCT, the IB of WIPO acts as a receiving office for the subject matter of the invention and an indication PCT applications from all Contracting States. It also of the fields searched, as well as any electronic data- handles certain processing tasks for all PCT applica- bases searched. tions filed with all receiving offices worldwide. International searching authority (ISA): A national International filing date: The date on which the patent office or intergovernmental organization receiving office receives a PCT application, provided appointed by the PCT Assembly to carry out interna- certain formal requirements have been met. tional searches. ISAs establish ISRs and written opinions on PCT applications. International Patent Classification (IPC): An internationally recognized patent classification system, Invention: A new solution to a technical problem. To the IPC has a hierarchical structure of language- obtain patent rights, an invention must be novel, involve independent symbols and is divided into sections, an inventive step and be industrially applicable, as classes, subclasses, and groups. IPC symbols are judged by a person skilled in the art. assigned according to the technical features in patent applications. A patent application that relates to National phase entry (NPE): The national phase under multiple technical features can be assigned several the PCT follows the international phase of the PCT IPC symbols. procedure and consists of the entry and processing of the international application in the individual coun- International phase of the PCT: The international tries or regions in which the applicant seeks protection phase consists of five main stages: for an invention. The entry must in general take place within 30 months from the priority date of the appli- 1. Filing of a PCT application by the applicant and its cation, although longer time periods are allowed by processing by the receiving office; some offices. NPE involves the payment of fees and, 2. Establishment of an ISR and a written opinion by where necessary, the submission of a translation of an ISA; the PCT application. 3. Publication of the PCT application and related documents, as well as their communication to designated Non-resident application: For statistical purposes, a and elected offices by the IB; “non-resident” application refers to an application filed 4. Optional establishment of an SISR by an SISA; with the IP office of, or acting for, a state or jurisdiction 5. Optional establishment of an IPRP by an IPEA. in which the first named applicant in the application is not domiciled. For example, an application filed with the For further details on the international phase, see annex, Japan Patent Office (JPO) by an applicant residing in A brief presentation of the Patent Cooperation Treaty. France is considered a non-resident application from the perspective of the JPO. Non-resident applications International preliminarily examining authority are sometimes referred to as foreign applications. (IPEA): A national or regional patent office or intergovernmental organization appointed by the PCT Origin: For statistical purposes, the origin of an appli- Assembly to carry out international preliminary exam- cation means the country or territory of residence (or inations (IPEs). Its task is to establish the IPRP (Chapter nationality, in the absence of a valid residence) of the II of the PCT). first named applicant in the application.

International preliminary report on patentabil- Paris Convention: The Paris Convention for the ity (Chapter II of the PCT) (IPRP): A preliminary Protection of Industrial Property is an international non-binding opinion, established by an IPEA at the convention signed in Paris (France) on March 20, 1883. request of the applicant, on whether the claimed inven- It is one of the first and most important intellectual tion appears to be novel, to involve an inventive step property treaties. The Paris Convention establishes, (i.e., is not obvious), and to be industrially applicable. among other things, the “right of priority” principle, Prior to January 1, 2004, this report was known as the which enables a patent applicant to claim a priority of “International Preliminary Examination Report”. up to 12 months when filing an application in countries other than the original country of filing.

99 PCT YEARLY REVIEW 2019

Paris route: Applications for patent protection filed searching and/or international preliminary examining directly with the national/regional office of, or acting authority, in the written opinion by an international for, the relevant state or jurisdiction (as opposed to the searching authority, the written opinion of an inter “national phase under the PCT”). The Paris route is also national preliminary examining authority or the interna called the “direct route” or “national route”. tional preliminary report on patentability.

Patent: An exclusive right granted by law to an appli- Prior art: All information disclosed to the public cant for an invention for a limited period of time (gen- about an invention, in any form, before a given date. erally 20 years from the date of filing). The patent Information on the prior art can assist in determining system is designed to encourage innovation by pro- whether the claimed invention is new and involves an viding innovators with time-limited exclusive legal inventive step (i.e., is not obvious) for the purposes of rights, which enable them to appropriate the returns international searches and international preliminary from their innovative activity. In return, the applicant examination (IPE). is obliged to disclose the invention to the public in a manner that enables others skilled in the art to repli- Priority date: The filing date of the application on the cate it. The patent system is also designed to balance basis of which priority is claimed. the interests of applicants (exclusive rights) with the interests of society (disclosure of the invention). Patents Publication of PCT application: The IB publishes the are granted by national or regional patent offices and PCT application and related documents promptly after are limited to the jurisdiction of the issuing authority. the expiration of 18 months from the priority date. If the Patent rights can be sought by filing an application PCT application is withdrawn or considered withdrawn directly with the relevant national or regional office(s), before the technical preparations for publication are or by filing a PCT application. completed, the application is not published. An applicant can request early publication of a PCT application. Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT): An international treaty administered by WIPO, the PCT allows applicants Receiving office (RO): A patent office – or the IB – with to seek patent protection for an invention simultane- which the PCT application is filed. The role of the RO ously in a large number of countries (PCT Contracting is to check and process the application in accordance States) by filing a single PCT international application. with the PCT and its regulations. The granting of patents, which remains under the control of national or regional patent offices, is carried out Resident application: For statistical purposes, a resi- in what is called the “national phase under the PCT”. dent application refers to an application filed with the IP office of, or acting for, the state or jurisdiction in which PATENTSCOPE search system: Provides access, the first named applicant in the application has resi- free of charge, to all published PCT applications along dence. For example, an application filed with the Japan with their related documents, and to the national or Patent Office (JPO) by a resident of Japan is considered regional patent collections from numerous offices a resident application for the JPO. Resident applications worldwide. Since April 2006, the PATENTSCOPE are sometimes referred to as “domestic applications”. search system is the authentic publication source for PCT applications. Supplementary international search report (SISR): A report, similar to the ISR, established during the PCT application: A patent application filed through supplementary international search, that allows the the WIPO-administered PCT, also known as an inter- applicant to request, in addition to the main interna- national application. tional search, one or more supplementary international searches, each to be carried out by an international PCT route: The procedure outlined in the PCT, as authority other than the ISA undertaking the main opposed to the Paris route. international search. The SISR primarily focuses on the patent documentation in the language in which PCT-Patent Prosecution Highway pilots (PCT-PPH): the SISA specializes. A number of bilateral agreements signed between patent offices that enable applicants to request an Supplementary international searching authority accelerated examination procedure because of pos- (SISA): See “Authority specified for supplementary itive patentability findings made by the international international search”.

100 ANNEXES

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO): A United Nations specialized agency dedicated to the promotion of innovation and creativity for the economic, social and cultural development of all countries through a balanced and effective international intellectual property (IP) system. Established in 1967, WIPO’s mandate is to promote the protection of IP globally through cooperation among states and in collaboration with other international organizations.

Written opinion of the ISA (WOSA): For every PCT application filed on or after January 1, 2004, an ISA establishes, at the same time that it establishes the ISR, a preliminary and non-binding written opinion on whether the claimed invention appears to be novel, to involve an inventive step and to be industrially applicable.

101 PCT Contracting States

In 2018, the number of Contracting States was of 152.

Albania Djibouti Lesotho Rwanda Algeria Dominica Liberia Saint Kitts and Nevis Angola Dominican Republic Libya Saint Lucia Antigua and Barbuda Ecuador Liechtenstein Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Armenia Egypt Lithuania San Marino Australia El Salvador Luxembourg Sao Tome and Principe Austria Equatorial Guinea Madagascar Saudi Arabia Azerbaijan Estonia Malawi Senegal Bahrain Eswatini Malaysia Serbia Barbados Finland Mali Seychelles Belarus France Malta Sierra Leone Belgium Gabon Mauritania Singapore Belize Gambia Mexico Slovakia Benin Georgia Monaco Slovenia Bosnia and Herzegovina Germany Mongolia South Africa Botswana Ghana Montenegro Spain Brazil Greece Morocco Sri Lanka Brunei Darussalam Grenada Mozambique Sudan Bulgaria Guatemala Namibia Sweden Burkina Faso Guinea Netherlands Switzerland Cambodia Guinea-Bissau New Zealand Syrian Arab Republic Cameroon Honduras Nicaragua Tajikistan Canada Hungary Niger Thailand Central African Republic Iceland Nigeria Togo Chad India North Macedonia Trinidad and Tobago Chile Indonesia Norway Tunisia China Iran (Islamic Republic of) Oman Turkey Colombia Ireland Panama Turkmenistan Comoros Israel Papua New Guinea Uganda Congo Italy Peru Ukraine Costa Rica Japan Philippines United Arab Emirates Côte d'Ivoire Jordan Poland United Kingdom Croatia Kazakhstan Portugal United Republic of Tanzania Cuba Kenya Qatar United States of America Cyprus Kuwait Republic of Korea Uzbekistan Czech Republic Kyrgyzstan Republic of Moldova Viet Nam Democratic People's Republic of Lao People's Democratic Republic Romania Zambia Korea Denmark Latvia Russian Federation Zimbabwe

Source: WIPO, March 2019.

102 World Intellectual Property Organization 34, chemin des Colombettes P.O. Box 18 CH-1211 Geneva 20 Switzerland

Tel: + 41 22 338 91 11 Fax: + 41 22 733 54 28

For contact details of WIPO’s External Offices visit: WIPO Publication No. 901E/18 www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/offices ISBN 978-92-805-3031-5